Can Alfonse D'Amato Save Poker?

Score one for the good guys. Former New York Sen. Alfonse D'Amato has graciously agreed to serve as chairman of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), to be its spokesman, and to lobby for a poker carve-out to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

The PPA is a grass-roots organization comprised of more than 100,000 poker players and enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game, ensure its integrity, and, most importantly, protect a poker players' rights.

Who better than 18-year congressional veteran Alfonse D'Amato to lead the fight? "Senator Al," as he is affectionately referred to, is known for such great accomplishments as requiring Swiss banks to return billions of dollars to Holocaust victims; he is known for caring about the needs of the individual constituent, and he is a fighter. He does not shy away from a fight; rather, he will embrace the fight to protect a poker player's right to play online.


Senator Al posed a question: "What about the veteran who fought for America and now is crippled and cannot get out? Why shouldn't he be able to play a little poker online and meet some friends? Only ambulatory people can play poker? What a tragedy!"

He asked: "Is betting on horse racing any different than playing poker? Why is there a horse racing exemption and a lottery exemption but nothing for poker? Horse racing has a powerful lobbying group, that's all. They have a voice. Poker needs a voice, and a loud one!"
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato is poised to be just that voice.

In between Senator Al's trips to Washington (where he is setting the stage for change) and London (where he plans to educate himself regarding UK online regulation), he and I met and chatted about the future of poker and how he viewed his role in it.

Allyn Jaffrey Shulman: Welcome to the PPA. We're very excited to have you sit as chairman of the PPA board. Congratulations on your unanimous appointment. Senator, when did you first hear about the PPA?

Alfonse D'Amato: In October. I heard about the PPA from Wayne Berman, a friend of mine who was my partner at one time, and who was also in our regular Thursday night game, every other week. He mentioned to me that the PPA existed.

I thought that the legislation being proposed was using a cannon to kill a gnat. What really needs to happen is to have a legitimate house, a fair game, and a fair operator, and not take away from 20-plus-million citizens who play poker the opportunity to play poker on the Internet. Why should they be deprived of Internet play and …

(Interruption: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is on the phone …)

AJS: I understand that you have two different roles in the PPA. Besides being chairman of the board, what is your other role?

AD: Well, after serving in Congress for 18 years, in 1999, I began Park Strategies LLC. My role in the PPA includes myself and my firm. We will be lobbying to reform the UIGEA. Although the Act was well-intentioned, it will fail to achieve its goals. We all want to protect kids; we don't want money laundering, and we don't want our citizens cheated. But, we don't want to waste our resources, either.

Our strategies will include getting Congress to reconsider the impact of the Act. What we want to get them to consider is that now, instead of getting controls over people who are underage, those who don't care about that are replacing the public companies who have good business practices, and there will be no safeguards. We should say, let's deal with mechanisms to curtail youngsters, make sure they don't play, and make sure reputable operations are taking place.

Of course, assigning to the authorities the tracking of terrorists and money laundering is an important task. Enforcing this legislation is a diversion of tremendous assets! Drug cartels and illegal transferring of money are serious issues. This legislation may be well-intentioned, but it misses the point. The revenue that could be derived and used in other areas of law enforcement is something that needs to be addressed. Regulation in this area, which would include different safeguards, is a more well-reasoned course of action. And, of course, the revenue that it would bring in would be so much better than the revenue that is now being spent to enforce the Act. We would be getting money to be spent in important areas, rather than spending money where it doesn't need to be spent.

AJS: Why are you and the PPA such a good fit?

AD: Well, I am fairly accomplished in legislation. I have maintained good relationships with both sides of the aisle, and hopefully I can get Congress to listen. We shouldn't drive the industry underground. If we cut off major banks, there will be others who will operate offshore, and may not be honorable. What will happen with no safeguards at all?

Poker is a game of skill that should be allowed to be played online. Betting on horse racing involves no skill … but in poker, there is skill. What about lotteries or fantasy football? Tell me about the skill level in fantasy football. And what do they do to protect young kids in those areas? Now, if you want to say that it's to protect kids, do it properly; don't drive the industry offshore, where we have no regulation and no controls.

It's just like Prohibition. No one says drinking is great; anything in excess can be a problem. You can't stop drinking and you can't stop gambling. And if we really wanted to stop gambling, what about casinos? Gambling isn't going to stop. People aren't going to stop. Why allow only casinos? Only ambulatory people can play poker? If a person is confined and doesn't have a way to get out, they're precluded. That is terrible! What a tragedy! Someone can't get out or can't get a ride, and they are deprived? And by the way, what about the opportunity to meet other players and socialize with them online? There is an element of unfairness here.

AJS: How big do you think the PPA has to be to have an impact on our government?

AD: I think it has to grow in size and grow in voice! That voice must say that we want you to regulate and not ban. Protect citizens! Ensure safety! Make sure that people are not being taken advantage of. England has been doing this for a long time. 20-million-plus Americans play online poker.

Last year, the World Trade Organization indicated that we may be in violation of WTO agreements. We're discriminating against other countries. Inevitably, we will be held not in compliance, and penalties will be levied against us. We need to regulate. There is an upside. Knock out unscrupulous houses. Regulate. Protect kids and those who are vulnerable. It is not onerous, because having a licensing procedure will pay for itself. The burden and expense would not be on the government. Tax revenues and the licensing procedure will pay the cost. Instead of the government paying out money to try to stop millions of Americans, we should see to it that the industry is regulated, and bring in money.

AJS: Do you think in 2007 that we have the ability to obtain a poker carve-out to the UIGEA?

AD: I think you never give up. You set the stage. I'm not going to say that it's going to be easy, or that it cannot be done. But I don't want to give a false impression. I intend to go to people who sponsored the legislation and educate them. Go to people you might not think would support a carve-out. Give them a reason to make a better bill, accomplish a better goal. Don't waste law enforcement resources. Provide safeguards. I was down in Washington yesterday to begin the process of education and answering questions. We will have to come up with effective answers that satisfy the concerns that we all have. That can be accomplished by effective regulation.

AJS: What are our biggest roadblocks?

AD: Well, I think convincing legislators that there is a better way to do what they want to do. They were acting under a number of influences. Interests in Las Vegas and sportsbooks wanted this legislation. Under the guise that gambling is bad, they came up with this all-encompassing area. Horse racing was left off because of the power of the industry! We need that same power in the poker industry.

AJS: What can the average poker player do to help?

AD: Reach out to friends. Join the PPA. Write to Congress. Call your senator. Don't give up. We need a strong presence - loud voices. Why should the industry be driven underground like Prohibition? Ensure that it's a fair game! Why should I be deprived? Why can't I use a legitimate bank? I want regulation! Make your voices heard!

AJS: What can poker sites, software companies, and the media do to help?

AD: I think the media has to talk about the inequality. Horse betting is OK. Lotteries are OK. If you have an addiction to horse racing, it is inconsistent to say that we will stop one group. If we are saying that Texas hold'em is bad, what about casino gambling? We're kidding ourselves if we think that we are going to stop the popularity of online gaming. We're not going to stop people from playing; you will only get unscrupulous groups to replace public companies. We are losing the opportunity for revenue by regulation. There will still be an industry. Big companies will continue to leave, only to be taken over by the underworld. That doesn't make sense.

AJS: American Gaming Association President Frank Fahrenkopf told me that he doesn't think a carve-out will happen, and that instead, a feasibility study should be done to determine whether regulation is an option. What do you think about regulating online poker?

AD: I've known Frank for 25 years. He's a wonderful guy, but he doesn't really care; if he wanted to help get a carve-out, he could help. A study will cause two years of inaction. Then, we will study the study. Then, we will discuss the study. And while we are busy studying the study, the industry will be driven underground.

AJS: Many people are outraged about the way the UIGEA was snuck through Congress at the 11th hour. First, is that an ordinary tactic? Next, were you offended, as well?

AD: It was a sneak attack, and former Majority Leader Bill Frist should be ashamed of himself. Now, Senator Kyl, who supported the Act, is a decent, caring, honorable man, on either side of the aisle. But for the majority leader to stop debate was abuse of the great authority given to him, by attaching it to a bill that had to pass. He did it not so much that he thought online gaming is horrendous, but to carry favor with the Christian right. That is an abomination!

He did the wrong thing to attempt to advance his political career, and it backfired on him.

AJS: There was talk that Frist agreed to get the UIGEA passed if Jim Leach would get Iowa to support Frist for president. Did you know anything about that?

AD: I heard the rumor that Frist agreed to get the bill through and he was looking for support. I don't know if it's true, but connect the dots …

It's pretty ironic, isn't it? There's a good chance that Leach was defeated because of poker players' outrage.


AJS: Do you think that a Democratic Congress has a better chance of passing a carve-out than the previous Congress?

AD: The nature of fighting for an issue like poker doesn't initially gain much support. We have to go about it by demonstrating that it is better to have controls and safeguards as it relates to poker, rather than attempt to ban and not have any ability to control. We have to educate members of Congress, get them to think about the issue differently. They all know cons. How about the pros? Do we regulate? Yes. Are we using resources to enforce the new law? Yes. Could the money be better utilized? Yes. We can better use that money! Do we want to build up a multibillion-dollar industry with less than reputable people? No. Let's exercise patience, perspicacity. (AJS interrupts: "Good word!" He spells it for her: p-e-r-s-p- … "My spell-checker already got it right!")

Churchill said never give up. It's not going to be easy. I took a trip to Washington yesterday to begin speaking with some of my colleagues. Today I am taking a trip to London to become more knowledgeable about licensing. Also, if Congress sees that the WTO is going to enact penalties, this may move us into compliance.

AJS: I am sure that you have heard of the new law that passed in the state of Washington in June of 2006, making it a Class C felony to play poker online. (Class C felonies carry a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $10,000 fine, just like certain types of rape and child molestation.) What do you think about criminalizing online poker?

AD: What? We're going to arrest doctors for playing poker online? It's outrageous!

AJS: What the heck is going on in this world of ours, where a poker player can be punished as harshly as a rapist?

AD: Nintey percent of Congress probably was not aware. They were told that people would not be prosecuted. Justice couldn't allow this.
(At about this time in the interview, Senator Al apologized and explained that he had to catch a plane to London and didn't want to be dressed in a suit, so he started taking his tie and shirt off. His lovely assistant, Dana, came rushing in and pointed to my computer, saying: "Write about that!" I told her that I couldn't because my eyes were closed.)

AJS: Many people assume that Republicans are opposed to online poker, although I imagine it's only the ultra-right Republican. How do you square being a Republican and supporting online poker?

AD: Trying to be Big Brother flies in the face of being a conservative Republican. We have lost our principles. We don't want people to play poker, but it's OK to bet on horse racing? We won't provide the same opportunity? It is inconsistent. It was the same thing with Prohibition. We will legislate, so you cannot drink? The policy is flawed, because it doesn't work.

Will we prosecute millions of people for playing poker but not for horse betting? This hypocrisy brings about contempt. It brings about disrespect for the law and disdain for the lawmakers.

AJS: What do you think about the recent arrests of the two former NETELLER executives?

AD: Well, ya know, they aimed guns at the big guys and it had its impact. We took a reputable company and ran it out. They no longer provide a needed service. They ran out a public company and left the door wide open for some unscrupulous group. It is better if NETELLER is back in the U.S.

AJS: What about the money belonging to U.S. citizens that NETELLER still has?

AD: Yes, something like $90 million. It's a shame. They're afraid to pay out the funds. And the federal government has put a hold on that money. I hope people get their money back. They are innocent victims.

AJS: I'd like to ask a few personal questions. Will you describe some memorable moments in your 18 years in Congress?

I read that you once filibustered for more than 23 hours against a military bill, and another time, in order to protect 750 jobs of New Yorkers, you sang South of the Border (Down Mexico Way). Would you tell our readers about that?

AD: Well, that's where the jobs would go. That was a midnight bill that snuck through. I tried to kill it by not letting them vote. After 23 hours, a lot of people just go home. At the end of the period, we lose a quorum.

Smith-Corona planned to move 875 jobs from its upstate New York typewriter factory to Mexico, to save wage costs so that it could compete against low-priced Japanese imports. So, I sang South of the Border (Down Mexico Way). I wanted to protect jobs.

AJS: And I remember that you were instrumental in getting Swiss banks to give money back to Holocaust survivors.

AD: I felt very good about my part in facing the Swiss banks and getting restitution for the Jewish community. I helped to get 1.25 billion dollars back. I led the battle to get that money from Swiss banks, kept from Holocaust survivors. Those are moments I enjoyed very much.

Eighteen years gave me a chance to fight for the little guy and for my state. I was privileged to have that experience. Serving with the great Ron Reagan was fantastic. He was one of the great human beings.

AJS: How did you get the name "Senator Pothole"? Are you proud of the nickname?

AD: I got it fighting for the little guys. Initially, it was pejorative, but then I made a difference for people. I embrace that name as a badge of honor.

There was a highway where people were getting killed, a deathtrap: Route 17, which is now called I-86. It needed to be bigger, safer. We got the federal government to put money in, and we saved countless lives.

AJS: Well, senator, I have to ask. Are you a better poker player or a better lobbyist?

AD: I would hate to make a living playing poker. I would be on food stamps!

AJS: Senator, you are a charming man. Thank you so much for your time and for agreeing to fight the good fight. Is there anything else you would like to say about your new role as spokesman for the Poker Players Alliance?

AD: I am pleased and privileged to be the spokesperson for the PPA. I don't know all the answers, but I am going to learn. Probably, people feel alienated, and I want to know about it. I want to use the information I learn. We are going to set up a website to be in contact with the people. I want to know how they feel and I intend to do something about it. This is not just about poker; it is about protecting personal freedoms.

And so it was on a chilly New York day on Park Avenue that Sen. Alfonse D'Amato discussed his plans to be the needed spokesperson for the PPA and fight for the rights of poker players. It's not just about playing poker; it is about protecting personal freedoms.