The Family Research Council comes out against Ron Paul!!

[TheEngineer]

Today's Family Research Council alert, at www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA08D45 . I noticed they now admit banks oppose UIGEA.

Strange Bedfellows

http://www.frc.org/img/item/WA08D43_NORMAL.jpg
According to The Hill, an unlikely duo is hoping to crush a law that would crackdown on Internet gambling. House Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ron Paul (R-Texas) have joined to block the enforcement of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act (UIGEA) through a new bill, H.R. 5767. Although UIGEA was overwhelmingly popular and passed by a 317-93 margin last year, government agencies have worked to implement it. Under H.R. 5767, the Federal Reserve, Treasury Department and Board of Governors would be "forbidden" from even trying. In effect, the bill would repeal a law that has the support of 48 state attorneys general, every major sports association, and pro-family groups. Through it all, Frank and Paul seem willfully ignorant of what UIGEA entails. Contrary to what they say, the Act isn't a federal ban on online gambling. Instead it uses federal resources to help the states enforce their bans, as has been done in the past to combat child porn. Of course, it's no secret that Frank is beholden to the banking industry, which rewards him handsomely for opposing UIGEA. Case in point, the Independent Community of Bankers was quick to endorse his new bill, claiming the current banking system "is just not set up to sort out whether one payment is a legal payment and one payment is not." Let's be honest. The problem isn't that bankers don't have the technology to do it, but that they don't have the desire to do it. Fortunately, FRC does. We will continue to be a vocal opponent of H.R. 5767 and any other bill that exposes families to the financial, emotional, and physical ruin associated with pathological gambling.

[TheEngineer]

I was hesitant to start a new thread, but this is important. If we want to remake the GOP, we'll have to get Congress to stop kowtowing to big government social con CINOS like FRC and Focus on the Family. If Congress gets tens of letters from us and tens of thousands of letters from these guys, Congress will conclude that they shouldn't vote for Ron Paul's bills, and the GOP will never change.

[bucfish]

I commend Rp for reaching out across party aisles to Barney and finding common ground.

[ARealConservative]

Their motto is "Defending Faith, Family, and Freedom"


riiiiiight :rolleyes:

[brandon]

I like how they managed to relate it to child porn. If you dont like someone, just find a way to link it to child porn or terrorism. Then no one will question you.

[TheEngineer]

I like how they managed to relate it to child porn. If you dont like someone, just find a way to link it to child porn or terrorism. Then no one will question you.

They've linked online poker to "potentially being able to be used to fund" terrorism (though they admit, when questioned, that it's never happened), too. :mad:

[WarningSLO]

Typical special interest group.

Calling Dr. Ron Paul ignorant when they are the ones that don't even understand his position on these bills. They're the ignorant ones. They are the ones that are willing to ignore the constitution so long as it benefits their agenda.

[TheEngineer]

I like how they managed to relate it to child porn. If you dont like someone, just find a way to link it to child porn or terrorism. Then no one will question you.

Also, in this April 11th blog entry about Dick Armey, at www.frcblog.com, Tony Perkins states:

"Armey mistakenly claims we are calling for the creation of more government intrusion into the lives of America’s families. Like Mr. Armey, I have a legislative record that is solidly conservative, for limited and smaller government."

LOOOOOOOL!! If UIGEA is limited government, I'd hate to see his idea of big government!!!

[TheEngineer]

Ron Paul made today's Focus on the Family alert today as well, at www.citizenlink.org/CLBriefs/A000007170.cfm:

Ron Paul Co-Sponsors Bill Legalizing Internet Gambling

Congressmen Ron Paul of Texas and Barney Frank of Massachusetts have sponsored legislation that would undo a federal ban on Internet gambling — a law that took family groups nearly a decade to put in place.

The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 gives financial institutions a government go-ahead to block payments to off-shore Internet gambling interests. The Frank-Paul bill, backed by the Poker Players Alliance, would cancel that blockade.

Dr. Valerie Lorenz, president and founder of the Forensic Center on Compulsive Gambling, says the Internet gambling industry feeds on anonymity.

“It is so readily available — in anyone’s home, at school, at work — without any kind of limitations or constraints,” she said. “You can gamble in the middle of the night at home when your family thinks you’re sleeping. Gambling is a profitable, greedy, private industry and government must protect citizens.”

TAKE ACTION
Contact your U.S. representative and ask him or her to oppose H.R. 5767, sponsored by Rep. Barney Frank and Rep. Ron Paul, which would legalize online gambling. You can send an e-mail through our Action Center.

[RonPaulFever]

Notice the title, "Strange Bedfellows"....Barney Frank is openly gay; is this some sort of subtle swipe at Dr. Paul?

Anyway, these idiots are still sending me mail ever since I paid a dollar to vote in that stupid straw poll last year. :D

some sort of subtle swipe....I'm quite the illiterate! I mean, alliterate....?:confused:

[jblosser]

Notice the title, "Strange Bedfellows"....Barney Frank is openly gay; is this some sort of subtle swipe at Dr. Paul?

I didn't think it was all that subtle, though they probably thought they were just being clever at Frank's expense more than Paul's.

[WarningSLO]

Gambling is a profitable, greedy, private industry and government must protect citizens

So government must protect us from business, capitalism, and the free market?

Riiiiiiiight.

[TheEngineer]

Notice the title, "Strange Bedfellows"....Barney Frank is openly gay; is this some sort of subtle swipe at Dr. Paul?

Anyway, these idiots are still sending me mail ever since I paid a dollar to vote in that stupid straw poll last year. :D

some sort of subtle swipe....I'm quite the illiterate! I mean, alliterate....?:confused:

Yes, that's an intentional swipe. They always intentionally reference Rep. Frank by name regarding all Internet gaming legislation.

[TheEngineer]

The revolution has spread to Congress! We really need to ALL stand strong. If you haven't yet, I ask that you all send the PPA letter to Congress today, at www.pokerplayersalliance.org/letter . We must stand for freedom, because thousands of sheep who are frightened by things like this will all write against Dr. Paul -- by name (as you saw in both alerts).

They've attacked us. Let's stand strong. Please write the letter RIGHT NOW and please post the link on other sites.

[brandon]

TheEngineer, What is the current status of internet poker?

About two years ago i played on partypoker. After they stopped accepting US customers due to the legislation, I switched to FullTilt. Somehow fulltilt could still do business here.

I havn't played in about 9 months now. Are there still sites that serve US customers?

[Dave Pedersen]

Government's primary obligation is to protect us from each other, especially our greed. Our leaders have discovered the best way to protect us from our greedy selves is to climb in bed with the most greedy corporations and that way they can keep a close eye on them. I am so pleased there are so many people with boundless compassion and love who watch out for my wellbeing and the general wellbeing of the greater community.. sigh.. makes me all wispy at times.

[angelatc]

TheEngineer, What is the current status of internet poker?

About two years ago i played on partypoker. After they stopped accepting US customers due to the legislation, I switched to FullTilt. Somehow fulltilt could still do business here.

I havn't played in about 9 months now. Are there still sites that serve US customers?

If we tell you, the government might come and protect you! Be careful!

[TheEngineer]

TheEngineer, What is the current status of internet poker?

About two years ago i played on partypoker. After they stopped accepting US customers due to the legislation, I switched to FullTilt. Somehow fulltilt could still do business here.

I havn't played in about 9 months now. Are there still sites that serve US customers?

Full Tilt and PokerStars still serve U.S. customers. Online poker is actually legal in the U.S., as the Wire Act applies only to sports betting. UIGEA is an effort to get banks to "overblock" all gaming transactions. That way, they get a de facto prohibition that they were unable to win legislatively while fooling the sheep into believing they were only voting for a bill to enforce existing laws!

Let's all write. I really hope to see more "sent" replies! They called Dr. Paul ignorant!

[mdh]

Barney Frank is openly gay

Do not want.

[constituent]

I was hesitant to start a new thread, but this is important. If we want to remake the GOP, we'll have to get Congress to stop kowtowing to big government social con CINOS like FRC and Focus on the Family. If Congress gets tens of letters from us and tens of thousands of letters from these guys, Congress will conclude that they shouldn't vote for Ron Paul's bills, and the GOP will never change.

+1

[constituent]

I havn't played in about 9 months now. Are there still sites that serve US customers?

my name is brandonyates, i haven't played texas hold 'em online in .... 9 months (????).

[TruthAtLast]

Let's ban alcohol to try to stop alcoholics.
Let's ban cigarettes to try to stop people from smoking.
Let's ban guns to stop violence (even though you can kill someone with a paper clip... let's ban Staples and Office Depot).
Let's ban R-rated movies because they are immoral.
Let's shut down Vegas and every game of bingo in the process. DAMN those gamblers! They are corrupting our society!

LOL

:D

[Melissa]

The revolution has spread to Congress! We really need to ALL stand strong. If you haven't yet, I ask that you all send the PPA letter to Congress today, at www.pokerplayersalliance.org/letter . We must stand for freedom, because thousands of sheep who are frightened by things like this will all write against Dr. Paul -- by name (as you saw in both alerts).

They've attacked us. Let's stand strong. Please write the letter RIGHT NOW and please post the link on other sites.

Sent my message to stop this, I love poker

[brandon]

my name is brandonyates, i haven't played texas hold 'em online in .... 9 months (????).

?? sorry i dont get your point

[TheEngineer]

Sent my message to stop this, I love poker

Thanks! :D

It's a great feeling to stand for liberty.

[TheEngineer]

Ron Paul made today's Focus on the Family alert today as well, at www.citizenlink.org/CLBriefs/A000007170.cfm:

Ron Paul Co-Sponsors Bill Legalizing Internet Gambling

Congressmen Ron Paul of Texas and Barney Frank of Massachusetts have sponsored legislation that would undo a federal ban on Internet gambling — a law that took family groups nearly a decade to put in place.

The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 gives financial institutions a government go-ahead to block payments to off-shore Internet gambling interests. The Frank-Paul bill, backed by the Poker Players Alliance, would cancel that blockade.........

So, ordering banks to be the enforcement arm of the federal government in this matter is "a government go-ahead to block payments", as if banks asked for this authority?!?!?!? LOL. At least the FRC article was honest in stating that banks don't want to do it, so they need to be forced (again, LOL...I thought this was America).

[constituent]

?? sorry i dont get your point

i worked at a place once and the manager was hardcore addicted to gambling online... i mean insane addicted, the entire place depended on whether or not he was up or down. your post reminded me of that. nothing personal, just the use of the specific number of months etc... maybe i should have put one of these :D

[No1ButPaul08]

Look at the ad at the bottom of this thread. Is gambling destroying your life? www.nongambler.com

Edit: Guess the ad changes but it was there for me

[brandon]

i worked at a place once and the manager was hardcore addicted to gambling online... i mean insane addicted, the entire place depended on whether or not he was up or down. your post reminded me of that. nothing personal, just the use of the specific number of months etc... maybe i should have put one of these :D

haha, ok I see where your coming from. It is highly addictive. Over the 1.5 years or so that I played, I must have deposited about 4000$ into my poker account. I won about 3500$ of that back. So a net loss of 500$ over 1.5 years isn't too bad. I just look at it as paying for entertainment. 28$ a month isnt too bad. Several times i came very close to winning 10 grand +.


I'll most likely play online again someday, I just cant afford it right now(the money or the time). I never gambled more then I could afford to lose.

[amy31416]

Okay, I just have to add this:

Poker? I hardly know her!

There ya go folks, I'm here all week.

[mdh]

FRC is an anagram of CFR. Coincidence? Go to work, guys.

[No1ButPaul08]

I posted this in the other thread but since thread was for this article I'll post it here too.


Although UIGEA was overwhelmingly popular and passed by a 317-93 margin last year, government agencies have worked to implement it.

Last year was 2007, the bill was passed in 2006. Good to see that they mention the bill got snuck through the Senate attached to a Port Security bill on the last day of the session.


Through it all, Frank and Paul seem willfully ignorant of what UIGEA entails. Contrary to what they say, the Act isn't a federal ban on online gambling. Instead it uses federal resources to help the states enforce their bans, as has been done in the past to combat child porn.

I don't know the exact details of the law, but is this true? I thought the law enabled Federal authorities to go after banks who broke the law. Didn't the law federally make all banking transactions involving gaming illegal, besides those that are exempted?


Of course, it's no secret that Frank is beholden to the banking industry, which rewards him handsomely for opposing UIGEA. Case in point, the Independent Community of Bankers was quick to endorse his new bill, claiming the current banking system "is just not set up to sort out whether one payment is a legal payment and one payment is not."

Interesting why they mentioned Frank's relationship with the banks and not RP's.
This is the biggest reason why I think poker will win this battle. The banks are on our side, and the banks almost always win. Ron Paul teaming up with the banks is quite the occasion.


Let's be honest. The problem isn't that bankers don't have the technology to do it, but that they don't have the desire to do it.

Let's be honest, if all the UIGEA regulations were implemented it would be another federal invasion of privacy while raising the costs of banking for everyone.

[Banana]

And it's a family issue? How?


So confused.

[No1ButPaul08]

And it's a family issue? How?


So confused.

Because gambling destroys families, can't you see the obvious.

[hawks4ronpaul]

They've linked online poker to "potentially being able to be used to fund" terrorism (though they admit, when questioned, that it's never happened), too. :mad:

"Potentially being able to be used to fund" would apply to the CIA and Federal Reserve too (did the 9/11 terrorists use dollars while in the US?).


http://hawks4ronpaul.blogspot.com/2007/12/strengthen-intelligence-by-cutting.html

[TheEngineer]

i worked at a place once and the manager was hardcore addicted to gambling online... i mean insane addicted, the entire place depended on whether or not he was up or down. your post reminded me of that. nothing personal, just the use of the specific number of months etc... maybe i should have put one of these :D

The irony of the FoF/FRC position is that the bills that explicitly legalize online poker and permit companies to operate onshore provide for industry-funded treatment and for identification of compulsive behaviors to take steps to identify and restrict them. The legislation also creates a master self-exclusion list that's good for all sites. And, these are not being forced on industry by big government. Rather, industries want the capability to work across companies for the long-term health of their industry.

How much funding does UGIEA provide? ZERO. That's fine with me as a small-government conservative, but it is almost ironic for FoF to propose a big government plan that fails to address the stated concern. I say "almost" because we know their goal is to completely legislate every aspect of our lives.

[RSLudlum]

Don't forget RP is co-sponsoring Frank's "Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008" also... :)

[Banana]

Because gambling destroys families, can't you see the obvious.

Well, call me a silly fuck!

And I suppose since alcoholism, extramarital affairs, absenteeism (e.g. deadbeat dad), drugs and not going to church on Sunday destroys families, too! Let's go and legislate those vices!

I'm starting to think that "pro-family" is just an euphemism for socialism...

[TruthAtLast]

sent letters

[TheEngineer]

Through it all, Frank and Paul seem willfully ignorant of what UIGEA entails. Contrary to what they say, the Act isn't a federal ban on online gambling. Instead it uses federal resources to help the states enforce their bans, as has been done in the past to combat child porn.

I don't know the exact details of the law, but is this true? I thought the law enabled Federal authorities to go after banks who broke the law. Didn't the law federally make all banking transactions involving gaming illegal, besides those that are exempted?

UIGEA makes financial transaction for interstate, online gaming that is unlawful under other laws unlawful. For example, online interstate sports betting is illegal under the Wire Act, so accepting wagers is illegal under UIGEA (though it's still perfectly legal to play, even sports betting). However, as the status of online poker is ambiguous (appeals courts have ruled that the Wire Act does not apply to poker, yet the DoJ claims it does), federal regulators have punted interpretation of what's legal and what's not to...banks (just as our Founding Fathers envisioned :confused: )!

The carveouts for fantasy sports, horse racing, etc. are a result of the ambiguity of currrent laws. Rather than try to decipher them, Congress decided to ignore that by stating that UIGEA does not apply to those activities.

[TheEngineer]

sent letters

Excellent! Way to stand up for liberty!

[amy31416]

I'm starting to think that "pro-family" is just an euphemism for socialism...

Shhhhh, you silly fuck. :)

[TheEngineer]

Well, call me a silly fuck!

And I suppose since alcoholism, extramarital affairs, absenteeism (e.g. deadbeat dad), drugs and not going to church on Sunday destroys families, too! Let's go and legislate those vices!

I'm starting to think that "pro-family" is just an euphemism for socialism...

Family groups have legislated every one of those issues at one time or another. :mad:

[hawks4ronpaul]

Well, call me a silly fuck!

And I suppose since alcoholism, extramarital affairs, absenteeism (e.g. deadbeat dad), drugs and not going to church on Sunday destroys families, too! Let's go and legislate those vices!

I'm starting to think that "pro-family" is just an euphemism for socialism...

Marx wrote that the family must be destroyed to achieve socialism and Leninism realized that the best way to destroy something was by claiming to save it (eg destroy the family by labeling your anti-family program as pro-family).


http://hawks4ronpaul.blogspot.com/

[TheEngineer]

Look at the ad at the bottom of this thread. Is gambling destroying your life? www.nongambler.com

Edit: Guess the ad changes but it was there for me

Yes, I noticed that as as well. Funny coincidence.

It seems they don't wish to ban gambling or anything (based on what's on their website). Rather, they wish to treat the 1% of people with a problem. That's cool. PPA works with groups like this (LOL at FoF for insinuating we don't care about the rare person with an issue).

[TheEngineer]

Marx wrote that the family must be destroyed to achieve socialism and Leninism realized that the best way to destroy something was by claiming to save it (eg destroy the family by labeling your anti-family program as pro-family).


http://hawks4ronpaul.blogspot.com/

When someone says they're doing something "for the children", you know one more liberty is going down the drain.

[Banana]

Marx wrote that the family must be destroyed to achieve socialism and Leninism realized that the best way to destroy something was by claiming to save it (eg destroy the family by labeling your anti-family program as pro-family).

Interesting- I knew about Marx's anti-family but didn't hear about Lenin's proposal to make all anti-family actions "pro-family". This would explains so much, I'd imagine.

[hawks4ronpaul]

Interesting- I knew about Marx's anti-family but didn't hear about Lenin's proposal to make all anti-family actions "pro-family". This would explains so much, I'd imagine.

I meant to refer to Leninism for the general point of claiming to save what you are destroying but I do not have a source that Lenin himself specifically referred to pro-family (although he might have).


http://hawks4ronpaul.blogspot.com/

[TheEngineer]

Okay, I just have to add this:

Poker? I hardly know her!

There ya go folks, I'm here all week.

Hehe. :D

[JaylieWoW]

Interesting- I knew about Marx's anti-family but didn't hear about Lenin's proposal to make all anti-family actions "pro-family". This would explains so much, I'd imagine.

"Destroy the Family and you destroy society"... Lenin

Though this might be labeled a bit as "group" mentality, you should check out family rights groups.

Plenty of people think we've had "welfare" reform. However, some welfare was shifted away from gov't handouts to a witch hunt on non-custodial parents. Oh the abuses I could list!

Look up Stephen Baskerville sometime. He's even had a few of his articles on LewRockwell. Funny thing is, I used to be very involved with a couple of groups up until Jan. 2007 (was acquainted with Ron Paul around Nov. 2006). It was my discovery of Mises.org specifically that got me to looking at the picture as a whole. I'd love to see all the suffering non-custodial's out there gain the knowledge I have in the past year. They might realize that by digging their trenches in family court, they aren't very likely to accomplish anything but smaller victories.

The problem ISN'T the family court system. It is the system as a whole. We no longer have mommy & daddy, we have statist nanny-ism. If only they realized this.

Anyway, there are some pretty good articles out there comparing the early Soviet "experiment" with "no-fault" divorce to our own (very failed) experiment with the same, easy come easy go marriage system. If you guys think cameras on every street corner are bad, you really ought to look at what happens to parents who don't "win" custody. I am married to one of those "deadbeat" dads (sarcasm, he's not, but all non-custodial dads get shoved in the same deadbeat category). It is because of the abuse we BOTH have suffered at the hands of his ex-wife (enabled by the system itself) that I came across RP, Mises and began my infatuation with Austrian Economics.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Last year was 2007, the bill was passed in 2006. Good to see that they mention the bill got snuck through the Senate attached to a Port Security bill on the last day of the session.

Those Family Research Council people sure do lie a lot.

[allyinoh]

Notice the title, "Strange Bedfellows"....Barney Frank is openly gay; is this some sort of subtle swipe at Dr. Paul?

[/I][/SIZE]

That's what I was thinking. What a poor choice of wording and most likely on purpose.



My question is, don't people understand that if someone wants to gamble, they should be able to gamble? And other than that, if it's going to be banned, shouldn't that be done on a state level and not a Federal level?

[freedom-maniac]

Through it all, Frank and Paul seem willfully ignorant of what UIGEA entails. Contrary to what they say, the Act isn't a federal ban on online gambling.

Yeah, it's Facism.

[constituent]

Interesting- I knew about Marx's anti-family but didn't hear about Lenin's proposal to make all anti-family actions "pro-family". This would explains so much, I'd imagine.

lenin applied that to everything, these days it is a tradition. my dad said the other day, "doublethink" is here to stay. it was funny hearing from my old man.


i always think of "the great leap forward"

[TheEngineer]

Nice post from a poker site:

My comment on FRC:

This comment is related to this: http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA08D45

My frustration lies with groups claiming to represent the interests of Christianity and family while simultaneously dispensing misinformation to support their cause. If the truth doesn't help your cause you need to reevaluate your position.

The UIGEA was not passed because it was "overwhelmingly popular", but rather because it was nested in must pass Port Security legislation. This is common knowledge.

In my family we call this lying by omission and our children are taught that it is wrong.

Although a similar bill passed the House easily, the UIGEA was never independently voted on. You can point to this statement and accuse me of splitting hairs but given the controversy surrounding the passing of this bill it is clear to me that the omission is intentional, dishonest and intended to overstate the popularity of what is widely regarded as a poorly written misguided law.

FRC wants to do what the banks don't? Really? I am certain you mean that FRC wants the BANKS to do what they do not. FRC has no more desire to fund the enforcement of vaguely written US legislation than anybody else does, so unless your planning on kicking up the money to lift the burden from the banks you ought to be a little less judgmental of their position.

The unfortunate individuals with gambling problems deserve a law that affects their problem. The UIGEA specifically provides EXEMPTIONS for lotteries, horse racing, and fantasy sports!! How does this help? It is clear that this law is not intended to prevent problem gambling and representing it as such is disingenuous.

I urge FRC to support H.R. 5767. Giving banks the power of determining the legality of transactions and blocking transactions IS a threat to our freedom.

Please research this before blindly jumping on board just because it appears at face value to be the moral side of the issue. Doing the wrong thing in the name of morality has been the thorn in the side of faith based groups all too often, and in my opinion undermines our credibility and our desire to share our beliefs . Christianity should avoid hypocrisy like the plague, and the UIGEA is riddled with hypocrisy.

I will be impressed if this post makes your website, and thoroughly unimpressed if it doesn't!

More info for the readers:

Washington, DC—House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and senior Financial Services Committee member Ron Paul (R-TX) have introduced legislation to prohibit the federal government from issuing regulations called for in the called for in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. The legislation, H.R. 5767, will forbid the Secretary of the Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System from proposing, prescribing, or implementing any regulation that requires the financial services industry to identify and block internet gambling transactions.

“These regulations are impossible to implement without placing a significant burden on the payments system and financial institutions, and while I do disagree with the underlying objective of the Act, I believe that even those who agree with it ought to be concerned about the regulations’ impact,” said Rep. Frank.

“The ban on Internet gambling infringes upon two freedoms that are important to many Americans: the ability to do with their money as they see fit, and the freedom from government interference with the Internet. The regulations and underlying bill also force financial institutions to act as law enforcement officers. This is another pernicious trend that has accelerated in the aftermath of the Patriot Act, the deputization of private businesses to perform intrusive enforcement and surveillance functions that the federal government is unwilling to perform on its own,” said Rep. Paul.

Specifically, at issue is the fact that the regulations, like the underlying legislation, fail to define the term “unlawful internet gambling,” leaving it to each financial institution to reconcile conflicting state and federal laws, court decisions and inconsistent Department of Justice interpretation, when determining whether to process a transaction. Furthermore, some of the information needed to make this determination would likely be unavailable to banks, either because customers or financial institutions in foreign jurisdictions are unwilling or unable to provide it. At the hearing, the regulators themselves admitted that there are substantial problems in crafting regulations to implement the UIGEA that does not have a substantial adverse effect on the efficiency of the nation’s payment system.

Chairman Frank and Congressman Paul opposed the UIGEA, and the two have been working on legislation, H.R. 2046 that would license and regulate online gaming. However, it was clear at the hearing that the regulations are unworkable for the financial services industry, and this bill would, therefore prohibit their implementation.

On Wednesday, April 2, the DIMP Subcommittee held a hearing “Proposed UIGEA Regulations: Burden Without Benefit?” to examine the regulations issued last year by the Federal Reserve and Treasury on the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which garnered more than 200 comment letters.

[TheEngineer]

After you send Congress the letter at www.pokerplayersalliance.org/letter, send your own letter, or call Congress, please post "sent" or "called" here to encourage others.

Congress is the next phase of the Revolution. Rep. Paul felt strongly enough about changing Congress to forgo a third-party run! Let's stand behind him.

[TheEngineer]

Yeah, it's Facism.

Couldn't agree more.

[TheEngineer]

My letter to FoF ( www.focusonthefamily.com/contact ):

Dear Sir/Madam,

I read the April 18th CitizenLink alert concerning Internet poker with some interest. The main thing that caught my attention was FoF’s willingness to greatly exaggerate the data regarding addiction rates relating to this activity. In fact, it’s exaggerated to the degree that the truthfulness of FoF’s statements could legitimately be called into question. It seems that if Internet poker were so obviously wrong, FoF would be able to argue against it with the truth.

FoF’s statements on Internet poker tend to imply that a large percentage of participants become addicted. However, the UK Gambling Prevalence Study has shown this to be below 1% for all Internet gaming. For games of skill like poker, one would imagine this would be even lower, as such games require a lot of thought and attention. Also, FoF frequently states that minors can play online. However, this assertion has been shown to be clearly false at two Congressional hearings on the matter.

FoF describes legislation seeking to regulate this industry as “dangerous”. However, unlike UIGEA (which does nothing at all for the rare person with a gambling problem), these bills provide for industry-funded programs for treatment of compulsive gamblers.

FoF also stated that UIGEA was passed simply to help the federal government enforce existing state bans on Internet gaming. However, only a handful of states have such laws, and only two have substantial penalties for playing. That’s why banks are not eager to enforce UIGEA, and that’s why neither the Treasury Dept. nor the Federal Reserve has been able to determine what state and federal law requires. UIGEA is a badly flawed bill that ought to be opposed by all conservatives on the grounds that it places excessive regulation on our nation’s financial institutions.

Yesterday’s action alert may scare 70 year olds, but many young people are poker enthusiasts who know the truth about the actual (low) rates of addiction. And, many have been reacting negatively to fundamentalist Christians as a result of this. They have referred to fundamentalist Christians as “Christanazis”, “nutty fundies”, and all sorts of other things on the Internet and other places. There is a lot of anger, to be honest. This would be fine if it were in defense of the truth and of the Bible, but this fight is about neither. In my opinion, the lies and the deceit FoF is willing to use to fight Internet poker do not represent a good witness. In fact, while it’s not my place to judge, I think FoF may be sinning by causing people to see Christianity in a negative light. And, unlike Internet poker issues, the Bible does command Christians to be good witnesses of the faith.

This “battle” will cost FoF many of its other priorities, as I suspect you’ll continue to lose support while paving the way for more big government. I encourage you to look into this more deeply. Perhaps you’ll find it’s time to fold.

Respectfully yours,

[me]

[VaderM5]

If you don't like gambling, don't gamble. :rolleyes:

[TheEngineer]

If you don't like gambling, don't gamble. :rolleyes:

Exactly!!

[TheEngineer]

Also, this is being discussed by the Paul-haters on the Hannity forum, at http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=630793 .

[tpreitzel]

Personally, I agree with the sentiment that some of these vices might be subject to control but only at the lowest level of government possible. Prohibition never worked to outlaw drinking, but it did eventually spawn a humongous bureaucracy, BATF, that has grown much larger than its predecessor, the Alcohol Tax Unit. ALL bureaucracies do likewise which is why we, the people, should rarely (constitutionally enumerated only) promote the creation of another bureaucracy at the federal level. Furthermore, laws always contain strings by which government gains even more control over people's lives. IMO, socially conservative groups need to more fully examine the consequences of passing such legislation at higher levels of government.

"Following the repeal of Prohibition in December 1933, the Alcohol Beverage Unit was removed from the FBI and the Justice Department, and returned to Treasury, where, coming full circle, it became the Alcohol Tax Unit of the IRS, ultimately evolving into the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF)."

[TheEngineer]

Here's a new letter from Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Ron Paul (R-TX), Peter King (R-NY), and Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) to the Treasury Dept (a similar one went to the Federal Reserve). The letters are at www.house.gov/apps/list/press/financialsvcs_dem/bernanke042108.pdf and http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/financialsvcs_dem/paulson042108.pdf :

April 21, 2008

The Honorable Henry M. Paulson, Jr.
Secretary
U.S. Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20220

Dear Mr. Secretary:

As you know, on Wednesday, April 2, the Committee on Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic and International and Monetary Policy held a hearing entitled, “Proposed UIGEA Regulations: Burden Without Benefit?” to examine the regulations issued last year by your agency and the Federal Reserve on the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). At that hearing, the testimony of your representatives and the industry made it clear that the regulations are unworkable. Subsequently, we introduced new legislation, H.R. 5767, which would prohibit their implementation.

The regulations, like the underlying legislation, fail to define the term “unlawful internet gambling,” leaving it to each financial institution to reconcile conflicting state and federal laws, court decisions and inconsistent Department of Justice interpretations, when determining whether to process a transaction. Furthermore, some of the information needed to make this determination would likely be unavailable to banks, because customers or financial institutions in foreign jurisdictions will likely be unwilling or unable to provide it. At the hearing, representatives from your agency and the Federal Reserve admitted that there are substantial problems in crafting regulations to implement the UIGEA in a manner that does not have a substantial adverse effect on the efficiency of the nation’s payment system.

Your agency and the Federal Reserve have been struggling to issue these regulations, but as the hearing made clear, the underlying statute makes your job extremely difficult, if not impossible. Given the many other priorities that are pending at your agencies, including the mortgage crisis, HOEPA, and UDAP rulewriting and many other issues, we believe it would be imprudent for you to devote additional agency resources to this Sisyphean task, especially as we intend to vigorously pursue legislation to prevent the implementation of these regulations.

BARNEY FRANK
Chairman
Committee on Financial Services

RON PAUL
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ
Chairman
Subcommittee on Domestic and International
Monetary Policy

PETER KING
Member
Committee on Financial Services

[TheEngineer]

C'mon now. Let's stand up for HR 5767 at www.pokerplayersalliance.org/letter . Is it a rEVOLution if we're not getting thousands of letters to Congress in support of bills Ron Paul cosponsors? Let's make sure Congress fears days that Rep. Paul introduces legislation, knowing they will be deluged with pro-freedom constituent letters, emails, and phone calls.

Once you've sent this letter, your own letter, or made a phone call to Congress, please reply with "sent" or "called". Thanks. :-)

[TheEngineer]

Not-So-Strange Freedom Lovers

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x223/TheEngineer2007/MeetingwithRonPaul1.jpg
Victor Ramdin, Andy Bloch, Rep. Ron Paul, Howard Lederer, Chris Ferguson, and me

[TheEngineer]

HR 5767 gained 10 new cosponsors yesterday! Details are at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.05767:

Sponsor: Barney Frank

Cosponsors:

Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] - 4/24/2008
Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] - 4/24/2008
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 4/24/2008
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 4/24/2008
Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 4/24/2008
Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] - 4/24/2008
Rep King, Peter T. [NY-3] - 4/24/2008
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 4/24/2008
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 4/24/2008
Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] - 4/10/2008
Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] - 4/24/2008

The PPA member letter to Congress, at www.pokerplayersalliance.org/letter, is definitely being read -- and we're being heard. I hope we'll all continue to post this info on blogs and other media to get folks to send this letter to Congress. When Ron Paul cosponsors legislation, he deserved thousands of letters of support from America's freedom lovers.

[torchbearer]

Their motto is "Defending Faith, Family, and Freedom"


riiiiiight :rolleyes:

They mean in that order....
They defend their particular faith, because it is the only true faith.... if you don't agree, you are the enemy.
Then they will defend family, but that means, what their faith tells them is true family values and that the laws must enforce those religious views on others...
and the last... freedom, the freedom to shut the fuck up if you disagree with them.

[torchbearer]

Wanna guess what grade the FRC gave me for being tolerant of other people and their beliefs?

[TheEngineer]

They mean in that order....
They defend their particular faith, because it is the only true faith.... if you don't agree, you are the enemy.
Then they will defend family, but that means, what their faith tells them is true family values and that the laws must enforce those religious views on others...
and the last... freedom, the freedom to shut the fuck up if you disagree with them.

You have that right! :D