Howdy, I'm a 2+2er - I'm also running for State Rep in Texas. And I've just posted this op-ed called "Why you can't play Texas Holdem in Texas."

Spoiler: It's because we don't have campaign finance reform.

http://www.boykotx.org/why-you-cant-...ldem-in-texas/

Let me know what you think.

So, uh...how come when I click on your district and "view current race" you're not listed? Looks like the next election for the district is 2014. Am I reading that correctly?

For what it's worth I live in your district. So, for now you're doing a good job of earning my vote.

The next general election is in 2014, and the Tribune only lists up to 2012. Additionally, there's no guarantee I'll be the Democratic nominee. I'm facing a primary challenge from Jill Hinckley, a nurse in Cedar Park, who agrees with me on most of the issues, just thinks that our most pressing issues are healthcare and the environment (while I believe our most pressing issues are campaign finance reform and election reform.)

She is a wonderful, wonderful person who is just an absolute dear, and if I wasn't running against her I'd be working my butt off to get her elected. But until then, I can't call myself "the" candidate, only "a" candidate.

OK well I'm sure I'll forget all about this by the election. Feel free to PM me when the primary comes around.

what do I think? I think it's time The Chickasaw Nation's plan to keep poker out of texas comes to light and their plan gets shut down.

hopefully we keep abbott out of the governers office as well as he doesn't support freedom either:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...texas-1355357/

I'm sure I'll be back before long. In the meantime, whaddya say, drop a buy-in on the campaign?

I'm a politician now, I have to be shameless about asking for money. And yes, I am aware my platform is campaign finance reform, and yes, the irony is not lost on me.

1. Can you legally accept donations from individuals who reside out of State ? 2. Do you have a website where folks can click a mouse to send Brian to the Texas legislature ?
3. Have to contacted the pro-poker PAC ?

Finally, are you committed to backing legalized poker, live and online, for Texas ?

gl man

Good luck hope you can do something. Matt Stillwell was also a supporter of poker is Texas in the last election. Texas House District 136 is going to be rough for Democrats. I am glad to see that you have a primary opponent.

1) I can legally accept donations from individuals outside the state of Texas, but not from non-US Citizens.

2) I do have such a website: www.boykotx.org/contribute

3) I have not contacted the pro-Poker PAC, though I don't think I can accept direct contributions from them - I may be wrong.

4) I believe legalizing poker live would be beneficial to Texas and support. Rep. Rodriguez's bill to do just that. Online poker is more tricky, but I don't see the harm in it. The problem is "committed." As much as I hate to say it, online or live poker just isn't a priority for Texas, not when we have problems with fracking, we can't maintain our roads despite an oil boom, we have the highest uninsured children and highest uninsured overall in the U.S...

What I can tell you, however, is that I am dedicated to the *root cause* which underlies why we can't make any progress on *any* of those issues including poker. - our broken campaign finance system and election system where money is far more powerful than votes. Let's get the money out and make votes count - then we can talk about addressing healthcare, the environment, and infrastructure, and then poker... not that it's a one-or-the-other deal, mind.

asking for out of state donations while railing against out of state donations is not just ironic, it keeps your position from being taken seriously.

Also, the problem with running on any kind of campaign finance reform is that everyone recognizes that the only money politicians want restricted is the money their opponents get.

you need to find money from competing interests to fight the Oklahoma tribe. What casino interests would like to move into Texas? That is where you need to go to get the money.

You can certainly point out the influence the out of state tribe holds over the TX legislature, and I certainly would make that point often. In my state, the tribes have a lot of influence and spend a lot of money to protect their interests, and if Pokerstars or some other entity isn't willing to spend money, nothing will get done.

why would taxes from poker, online and live, not help with this?

you over estimated the amount of taxes that poker would bring in

and why on earth would it not be easy to just legalize online and live poker in texas making the people happy and increasing tax contributions, then go back to the issues mentioned that seem to always hold up getting anything done in this state? How about legalization of weed as well?

I'm getting tired of the same old excuses when I've mentioned two easy fixes that will help get the rest done.

I'm not saying it's enough to solve all of our problems but its more than we have currently.

Poker players, by and large, are unable or unwilling to fully engage in the political process. In my State, proponents have raised/spend $4 million trying to get GMO labels on food products. let me say that again, $4 million to get GMO labeling on food.

Where are the poker players, and why aren't they fighting for internet poker?

I agree, it's ridiculous.

Sorry, but "I don't see the harm in it" will not convince any supporter of online poker to write you a check.

Thanks for your candor, but good luck with the race.

I'm not railing against out of state donations from individuals. I'm railing against corporate donations designed to push for political policies. In-state, out-of-state, whatever.

Maybe. But I'm not that jaded yet.

Really, it shouldn't have to be that way. I understand that it *is* that way, but the only reason to run for office, in my opinion, is to fix it so that we no longer have politics dominated by money.

Getting reformers in office is the tough part - but getting money out of politics is the easy part. The American Anti-Corruption Act is one example of creating a competing public financing of elections that is competitive with private financing of elections, allowing politicians to truly represent the people, not just their funders.

Because, quite frankly, a great amount of money is being spent to make sure that poker and weed are kept illegal; and until we break the hold money has over elections, we can't make progress on poker, on marijuana decriminalization, or any other issue near and dear to your hearts.

Online poker is a different beast. Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE for online poker to be legal in Texas. But unlike live poker, we don't really have a whole lot we can build on to ensure oversight. Nevada's Ultimate Poker may go overboard with the whole geolocation thing, but there's no doubt Nevada knows gambling law and how to ensure that technological gambling programs are conducted fairly. Texas just doesn't have the infrastructure in place, and I don't want to risk another Ultimate Bet/Full Tilt if we can't be confident about it.

Even if you took all of the money out of politics, nothing would change. Politicians would still have to give the people what they want, and there would still be opposing points of view of just what that was. Organized interest groups would still have the advantage over those who sat back and watched it happen.

And, alas, poker is a fringe issue that doesn't have widespread support. Those most effected by the restrictions are the ones sitting back and watching it happen.

I gotta disagree with you here. Yes, organized interest groups would have the advantage over those who sat back and watched it happen - but we don't have that now.

What we have now are *rich* interest groups who have the advantage over *poor* interest groups.

it's a shame a great amount of money is spent to make sure these things are illegal for ones personal beliefs, when the money could be spent on actual legit issues that negatively affect people. might also want to tell these people who provide the money that their objective would be better solved with legalization and regulation, rather than forcing it underground fueling organized crime, putting the consumer at risk, zero safe guards or oversight, and not to mention receiving zero tax dollars from it.

I guess it just makes too much sense to do any of this.

There is no need to reinvent the wheel. Here's the easy solution, join forces with Nevada.