Text Link Ads


Thursday, February 17, 2011

The Poker Player’s Alliance Message from John Pappas

Last night (Wednesday Feb. 16, 2011) John Pappas sent out a message about online poker legislation. The first half was another lame attempt to justify their support for the Harry Reid legislation even though it included a 15 month freeze on all online poker while licensing, etc. was taking place.

My position is that even if you believe that the 15 month freeze won’t turn into a 20 month freeze or a forever-until-there-is-replacement-legislation freeze it is too brutal for those that make their living either playing or supporting online poker.  This is not a small number of people and includes yours truly so yes I do have a bias (just as the PPA should!).

There is no legitimate reason for ANY freeze in online poker during the enactment of this sort of legislation.  In fact the lack of a freeze during the enactment would be incentive for the state and federal govt. to speed the licensing process so they can start to receive tax and licensing revenue sooner. 

Other provisions of current legislation restrict people to playing against online people in their own country (or in the case of a recent California bill their own state)—this is also ridiculous—The United States has a great opportunity to license and regulate brands of online poker on our shores that would have a heretofore unknown level of integrity that would and should attract players from around the world.  And Yes I just said heretofore.

Please continue to put pressure on the PPA to reject ANY freeze on online poker in future legislation.  And to follow the rest of their stated plans for 2011 internet regulation:

During this Congress, the PPA will seek to improve key aspects of the draft bill, including:

  1. eliminate/reduce the playing freeze
  2. eliminate/reduce the restriction on global player pools
  3. increase the number of automatically opted in states
  4. establish favorable tax treatment for online players
  5. ensure that legislation does not unfairly discriminate against companies who currently serve the U.S. market.