The momentum for making online poker unquestionably legal has slightly shifted toward poker thanks to several events that happened in Washington, D.C., in October and November, as well as the World Trade Organization issue.
First, the Poker Players Alliance had nearly 100 of its members show up in the country's capitol, mainly to meet with their representing legislators to let them know that they're not pleased with how the United States is working to boycott the online gambling industry. The fly-in helped put this issue right in the offices of members of Congress in key states, as well as in front of non-poker fans, thanks to the heavy mainstream media presence who covered various aspects of the event.
A few weeks later, a hearing titled "Hearing on Establishing Consistent Enforcement Policies in the Context of Online Wagers" took place. The hearing featured Annie Duke, who articulately and intelligently outlined why she feels online poker should be embraced by the United States government. Rep. John Kyl, who is one of the great opponents of online gambling, repeatedly tried to engage Duke in a debate, and each time she managed to outmaneuver him with common sense and hard statistics. Portions of the hearing can be found at the PPA website.
A highlight from the hearing, which was held simply to inform the House Judiciary Committee about the online wagering, was when Tennessee Congressman Steven Cohen clashed with Tom McClusky, the vice president of government affairs for the Family Research Council.
In his southern drawl, Cohen engaged McClusky, whose organization is one of the most powerful conservative organizations in America. On the topic of gambling, he had this to say to McClusky: "So, if it's restricted or unrestricted, you're against it. Is there any fun that you're for?"
And just last week, both Mass. Rep. Barney Frank, who chairs the House Financial Committee and also has a bill in committee that would clear the road for online gambling in America, and Mich. Rep. John Conyers, who chairs the Judiciary Committee and presided over the gambling hearing, authored a letter to both President George Bush and the U.S. Trade Representative office.
The letter criticized the administration and the office for the way they handled the conflict between Antigua and the rest of the World Trade Organization, a conflict that could potentially cost the United States billions of dollars in sanctions.
They wrote: "We are very concerned about the precedent this sets for future situations in which parties to these agreements find a particular obligation inconvenient or politically difficult. Traditionally, when a U.S. law has been found to be out of compliance (with WTO rules), the administration has consulted with Congress about possible legislative solutions that seek to bring the U.S. back into compliance. In this case, however, your agency has chosen not to consult with Congress, but to instead take what we view as a drastic step which could have significant consequences for the entire WTO system."
Representatives Robert Wexler (D-Fla.), John B. Larson (D-Conn.), Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.), Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), and Joseph Crowley (N.Y.) also signed the letter.
