Legalize Texas Gambling Blog

Time to Act!

2011-03-31T13:17:00.001-07:00

Hearings are being held to decide if YOU, the voter will be allowed to vote on casinos in Texas. Go to the following website and contact your representative now!

http://www.thankyoutexas.com/

The Alternative

2011-03-23T05:18:00.000-07:00

The Texas legislature has decided to pander to the NRA this year and pass legislation allowing students to carry handguns on all college campuses. It will also be against the law for a teacher to ask if a student has one or to try to prohibit them during class or office hours. Inside sources in the legislature say this bill will pass, and the only question is whether they will lower the age from 21 to 18. Apparently, the Republicans plan to fix the budget deficit by reducing educational costs--enable students to shoot their fellow students and teachers so as to eliminate teacher salaries and decrease capacity enrollment costs.

..well it was either that or do something insane like legalize gambling and generate tax revenue and jobs, right?

Could the time be now?

2010-12-26T06:12:00.000-08:00

There are 101 republicans in the House...an uber-majority. They can do whatever they want. Unfortunately, most of them ran on an anti-gambling platform.

However, with the budget in a wreck, some analysts think they may have little choice but to follow other state's lead in reducing the budget through expanded gambling.

"Too many states have had success in cutting their budget deficits through expanded gambling. For Texas lawmakers to continue to lag behind the rest of the country when it comes to gambling expansion would be foolish.” - Steve Schwartz, Gaming Analyst.

Could this be the year? Or will we get another 'franchise' tax to skirt the 'no new taxes' promise again?

More from the PPA - Info. on the online poker bill's blackout period

2010-12-09T19:24:00.000-08:00

This just in from the Poker Players Alliance:

I wanted to update you on the status of Congressional efforts to pass
legislation which would license and regulate online poker in the U.S.
While it remains an open question whether a bill will succeed during the
"lame duck" session happening now, I want you to know what we are doing
to protect your right to play online poker.

The PPA has been and continues to work night and day on this
issue. While many have speculated that the "Tax Bill" would be a likely
vehicle for iPoker legislation, because of recent political developments
with respect to the tax bill it has become complicated to predict whether that bill is a viable path. I still maintain, as I told the Wall Street Journal (click to read) yesterday when the rumors circulated that the bill was dead, that nothing is dead until Congress adjourns.

Let me assure you that we have heard and strongly considered the
concerns a number of our online poker playing members have raised,
specifically regarding the 15 month "blackout period" contained in the
draft bills that have circulated in recent days. The blackout period
means that upon enactment of the proposed internet poker law there would be fifteen
months where NO licensed Internet poker would be available to U.S.
players. In all likelihood, some of the web sites where
you currently play would leave the market so they can go through the
process of obtaining a U.S. license and then re-enter the market after the 15 month blackout period.

Frankly, the proposed blackout period is absurd and
the PPA opposes it. And we have fought – and continue to fight – tooth
and nail against it. But it is a reality. There will likely be a
blackout period of some length included in any legislation that is
passed, whether it is in this Congress or future Congresses. Our
opponents have been throwing their weight around to get a lengthy
blackout period included and, unfortunately, I fear they are winning.

That being said, upon significant analysis, review and reflection, we believe that the long- term benefits of this bill to the poker community make the blackout period a bitter pill we have to swallow. Our goal is to establish a permanent, safe and
regulated U.S. online poker market, similar to the European regulatory
markets. While many think the status quo works and is fine, it is not a
long term solution and cannot last.

Without Federal licensing and regulation, individual states could – and have started – to license play within their borders only, setting up monopolies that will not provide you with the playing experience you’ve come to expect. Or they
will ban online poker altogether, like Washington State has done. That
is why the PPA encouraged you earlier this week to contact your
Senators and voice support a Federal bill before the end of the year.

We believe that the trade off for getting regulated, permanent US
online poker market is worth a temporary blackout of some sort. It’s not what we want, either, and it’s not what we pushed for in Congress, and we don’t even like it. But when viewing this from the perspective of maintaining a sustainable Internet poker market the 15 month period is short-term pain for a long-term gain.

This has been a very tedious process and seems to change from moment to
moment. As Congress considers bills throughout the remainder of the
lame duck, we will continually update you on our progress.

Thank you, as always, for your support and we welcome your thoughts and feedback.

Proud to Play,
John Pappas
Executive Director
Poker Players Alliance

Latest news on online gambling from the Poker Players Alliance

2010-12-08T05:15:00.000-08:00

You have likely heard news reports that the U.S. Congress is considering legislation to regulate Internet poker and that this bill could be brought up during the “lame duck” session happening now. The Poker Players Alliance has been fully engaged in this process. We are currently working very hard to ensure that the final bill is something the poker community can embrace, but it won’t be easy. We have our detractors and even other gaming interests do not fully appreciate the current marketplace, nor do they respect the ability of Americans to continue playing online unless they control the system.

Be assured, Congressional advocates for regulated Internet poker do not share those views. They believe in a robust and competitive marketplace with strong consumer protections that will, in the long-term, provide an even greater experience for the poker player than today.

It is because of this support that the PPA is urging our members to act TODAY. We ask that you contact your U.S. Senators and urge them to support legislation that licenses and regulates Internet poker.

Simply click the button below to send an email to Senators Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Sen. John Cornyn

Once you’ve sent the email, please follow up with a phone call.

Call Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison at (214) 361-3500

Call Sen. John Cornyn at (512) 469-6034.

Tell them:

You are a poker player and a voter
You support efforts to regulate Internet poker and that Congress should pass a bill before the end of year
Licensing and regulation provides needed consumer protections and also raises revenues without raising taxes
Please support this effort to expand freedom to adult consumers who want to play a game of skill on the Internet
Thank you for your consideration

After your call, please take a few minutes to let us know how it went by clicking here.

Thank you for taking this action today. It is critically important that we voice our support to get this done this year! As more details about the bill are available, we will continue to update you.

Proud to Play,

Senator Alfonse D’Amato
PPA Chairman

The Confusing Republican Texas

2010-11-03T05:38:00.000-07:00

Well, the entire Republican party and all of their relatives got voted into office yesterday. It seems like that would be a good thing for gambling. Since the Republican party caters to big business and is supposed to be anti-taxes it seems like casino-style gambling would be the perfect way to bring in more big business to Texas and create a new revenue source to avoid having to raise taxes right? Especially when we have an 11-17 billion dollar state budget shortfall to deal with this session.

But wait a second, we have had a republican-dominated State for many years. Rick Perry has been in office so long, they are going to have to retire his underwear and hang it in the Capitol after this term! And he has dealt with big budget shortfalls before--he gave us the gift of a state income tax in the disguise of a franchise tax.

Perry has already come out against expanding gambling in Texas. And we all know he likes to wield his veto power like a Cuban dictator. The only glimmer of hope I see in the situation is that Perry flipped on his "no state income tax" platform, so maybe he will sell out his anti-gambling supporters too this time.

Letter From The Poker Players Alliance

2009-09-11T01:51:00.000-07:00

I recently received the letter below and am passing it along:

Dear Paul,

The PPA's efforts are paying off in Washington, DC! Legislation has been introduced in both the U.S. House and the Senate that will affirmatively license and regulate Internet poker.These federal bills respect states' rights by allowing each state to choose whether its citizens can participate. With Congressional action on these bills expected in the near future, we must start now to let TX's elected officials know we demand the right to play poker on the Internet.In just 60 seconds, you can send a letter to your governor and lawmakers. It is critical that your governor, state senator, and state representative hear from you TODAY. Your state officials need to know that passing up the opportunity to license and regulate online poker would limit your freedom while ignoring the needed revenue the program would bring to TX.Please take a moment and send the following letter. By doing so, you will help us to achieve our shared goal of protecting poker wherever it is played.

http://capwiz.com/pokerplayersalliance/home/

Proud to Play Poker,
Alfonse D'Amato,
ChairmanPoker Players Alliance

The Negative Effects Argument

2009-04-11T07:58:00.000-07:00

I love when I hear someone make the argumant that allowing casinos will bring undesireable businesses such as sexually-oriented businesses and pawn shops into Texas. This "Negative Effects" argument is a bunch of bull.As for pawn shops, last I checked, they are already here and they are not illegal.But the arugment that really makes me laugh is the sex shops argument. As if making gambling illegal somehow prevents sexually-oriented businesses from coming to Texas.Here's a startling fact. The U.S. government has released statistics showing that 18,000-20,000 people are trafficked into the U.S. as slaves every year. Most of those are brought in as sex slaves. Most are women and children. Most are between the ages of 11 and 18. They have been found in all 50 of the United States. Wow, bad huh? here's the kicker:20% of them are located in the State of Texas.That's right, we have 10 times our fair share. They are brought here to be conditioned, trained, enslaved..and work as prostitutes, sex slaves and porn models. Making gambling illegal has done a wonderful job of keeping the sexually-oriented businesses out of Texas, huh?It's time to drop the myth that legalized gambling brings about the sex shops. I'm all for fighting against those. Go to HomeofHopeTexas.org if you really want to help in this battle. But this B.S. about gambling being the problem is simply a big lie.Stats taken from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU4U3ssZBUg

The Poker Gaming Act of 2009 - HB 222

2009-01-30T20:37:00.000-08:00

Jose Menendez has filed a bill to declare poker a game of skill and allow the licensing of certain qualified commercial and charitable operators to spread poker in Texas entitled: The Poker Gaming Act of 2009. The requirement to run poker games is that you must have a liquor license, race-track operators license, be tax-exepmt or be an indian reservation. Read the text of HB 222. There are rake resrtictions of 10% up to $4.00 and a tournament size restrictions of a maximum of a $100.00 buy-in.Overall I think the bill is a good start. I do not like the tournament buy-in restrictions at all. Its the big buy-in tournaments that attract tourism and help bring in tax dollars from other States.

400 Million Reasons to Bring Back the Proposal to Legalize 12 Casinos in Texas

2008-08-24T12:40:00.000-07:00

While visiting Iowa this weekend, I picked up the saturday edition of The Des Moines Register and was drawn to an article entitled: "Iowa tries to block tribe's casino plans." It seems in iowa a certain indian tribe is trying to build a casino that will be exempt from state taxes and both Iowa and Nebraska are trying to thwart their plans (because they both have tax-paying casinos nearby).
In the reasons cited for Iowa's resistance, the article indicates that the proposed casino would be "adjacent to Council Bluffs" which is home to three casinos-Horshoe, Harrah's and Ameristar. It further states that those three casinos "generate more than 100 million annually in state, city and county taxes."
If three casinos can generate 100 million in taxes for the state of Iowa, imagine what 12 casinos could do for the State of Texas. 400 million or more. Perhaps if we presented this aspect to the public and proposed to use that money to lower property taxes to benefit everyone instead of trying to use it for college scholarships (as was done last session) which only benefits some, we could pass the bill? Food for thought as the 2009 legislative session approaches.

San Antonio D.A. Takes Big Money Deal in Exchange for Gambling Prosecution

2007-10-17T19:16:00.000-07:00

2006 WSOP finalist, Richard Lee, was congratulated for his efforts by his home town D.A. by raiding his home. In August of 2006, not long after the WSOP, Lee was charged with operating a gambling and bookmaking operation from his home in San Antonio.
On Tuesday, Oct. 16, 2007, the D.A. accepted a plea bargain where Lee got a misdemeanor slap-on-the-wrist for keeping a place of gambling in exchange for a no contest plea and $2.5 million dollars. See article here.
Wow, what does a murder rap buy-out cost?
Is the war on gambling about truth? justice? morals? ...or perhaps, it's about the Benjamins.

This Doesn’t Look Like Kansas, Toto...Kansas First to Have State-Owned Casinos

2007-09-16T18:38:00.000-07:00

During the past two years, several people have asked me for my opinion of various proposals to expand gambling Texas. My answer has usually been: "well it is not the plan I would create if it were up to me, but I am for any plan that gives us the freedom to gamble in our own State."
Many have then asked: "what would you do if it were up to you?" My response has been to suggest a plan where the state owned the casinos so that a larger chunk of the profits went back to the state rather than just placing a tax on a privately-owned casino.
The ususal reply I get is: "Is that possible?"
Possible? Kansas is aiming to do just that.
Kansas will be the first state to open state-owned casinos. The State will own the equipment, land, and buildings of four casinos soon to be constructed and opened. They will contract out the management of day-to-day operations to private companies for "privilege fees" totalling 80.5 million. The casino employees will be employees of the contractor. Kansas will receive 22% of the annual revenue of each casino.
To put this in perspective, Mississippi casinos generated 2.6 billion in revenues in 2006. 22% would amount to $576 million annual revenues. That could reduce alot of property taxes and fund alot of educations.
Kansas has finally woken up to the fact that its people are going to play somewhere. It can either be in their own state, or the one next door. When will Texas finally wake up?

Obsolete Poker Chips for Trade

2007-08-26T14:30:00.001-07:00

I have acquired some poker chips from a closd casino-- The Jack Niemann Casino that was located in Bellingham, Washington. It was reportedly closed after about 3 months of operation.
I have about 100 of the $1.00 denomination chips for trade. I am interested in trading them for other obsolete casino chips, hard-to-find chips, foreign chips or current chips from states other than Louisiana, Texas or Nevada. $1.00 denomination preferred.
If you are interested, email me at paul@legalizetexasgambling.com with the chips you have for trade.
Paul
click here for chip image.

Focus on the Family Plays Politics Again

2007-08-05T11:26:00.000-07:00

Once upon a time, James Dobson's Focus on the Family was a good family-service organization. Dobson wrote and promoted several great books and Bible studies that were aimed at helping people.
Then one day, they decided to play politics. Forget the separation of church and state notion this country was founded on, by golly Focus on the Family and other religious organizations decided they wanted to legislate morality through politics.
This has not fared well. The republicans immediately jumped in bed with them and gained their political support by claiming they supported "family values." Then churches followed, with political speeches from the pulpit denouncing the democrats in favor of good brother Bush and other "conservative" candidates. Now, after watching the Rush Limbaugh's abuse drugs and senators sending naughty emails to little boy interns, people wonder what "family" the republicans and these religious organizations envisioned in their family value campaign.
The good name of Focus on the Family has, in my opinion, been tarnished. In addition to the above, they were linked to helping convicted felon, Jack Abramoff, stop an indian tribe from expanding a casino that was in direct competition with one of Abramoff's clients. See article here. Of course, Dobson et al claim it was a coincidence they were fighting the same casino, but emails obtained from Abramoff and cohorts by subpoena suggest otherwise.
Now Dobson and crew have joined with other religious groups in writing a letter to the U.S. Congress attacking online gambling and urging congress to continue to defy the World Trade Organization's ruling against the U.S...a defiance that could result in severe sanctions including the dishonoring of our copyright, trademark and patent laws.
What is their justification for asking this? In their letter, they justify their request by making self-serving conclusory allegations such as their claim that internet gambling "creates fertile ground for criminal activity and threatens homeland security by potentially funding terrorist activity." But they offer no evidence to support this claim.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am unaware of a single internet casino that has been proven to have links to terrorist funding. I am unaware of anyone who has been convicted of funding terrorism through online gambling. But of course, if you want the government to do something, the best thing you can do is claim the opposite action has links to terrorism so that the government can justify it to the people--true or not.
If we are going to outlaw online gambling because it "threatens homeland security by potentially funding terrorist activity," then logically, we should outlaw everything that has the potential to fund terrorist activity. The first thing we outlaw in that category will have to be religion.
Think about it. There is a large amount of loosely accounted for cash flowing through in the offering plates that can easily be piped to terrorist organizations. In fact, after 911, a number of religious organizations were shut down as groups that funded terrorists. Thus, we know for a fact religion has funded terrorism. I'm sorry Mr. Dobson, but under your own logic, you will have to shut down Focus on the Family. It clearly has the potential to fund terroist activity.
I am not advocating the banning of religion. I am merely pointing the above out because it shows how poorly thought out the letter to Congress was in this case. The letter throws around politically motivating phrases without any substantiation of the claims and the argument for banning online gaming is completely illogical.
The family values movement was a farce. The first gambling letter got Focus on the Family scruitinized for having assisting a now convicted felon. Now this letter resorts to unsubstantiated self-serving allegations and illogical arguments to obtain a desired result. These do not seem like the tactics of a good religious organization. They seem like the tactics of a dirty politician. Perhaps the reason our forefathers separated the church and the state is not because of the effects religion would have on politics but because of the effects politics has upon all it touches. The more Dobson and Focus on the Family delve into politics, the less they look...well, for lack of a better description...Christ-like.

Neteller Returns 94 Million to U.S. Customers

2007-07-30T16:48:00.000-07:00

The official email notice has been sent. Neteller has announced that U.S. customers may log in and request a fund return starting July 30, 2007. Here is the official announcement:

The NETELLER Plc Group has announced that the distribution of funds to its US members will begin on July 30, 2007.
You are receiving this e-mail because our records reflect that you are a US member who may request funds from NETELLER. As of July 30, you will be able to make a request for funds on NETELLER's website by signing in to your account. In the meantime, you should visit our online FAQs for more information about the distribution plan.
Please note that US members will not be able to request funds from the NETELLER website after January 26, 2008.
NETELLER Plc Group

Get your money by January 26, 2008 or kiss it goodbye.

H.R. 2046, Are We Replacing Bad Law with More Bad Law?

2007-07-22T14:41:00.001-07:00

On its hype, H.R. 2046, The Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act, sounds like the savior of the online gambling world. It's sponsor, Barney Frank of Massachusetts, talks of how the Unlawful Internet Gambling Prohibition Act is an intrusion upon individual freedoms in interviews as if his Bill would do away will all prohibitions on online gambling. However, the Bill is a far cry from that. Perhaps we should focus on repealing the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act instead of substituting one problematic law for another.
H.R. 2046 provides a method for online gambling companies to become licensed to operate in the U.S. by subjecting themselves to U.S. jurisdiction, regulation and taxes. But this would not give them the right to operate openly and freely across the United States.
H.R. 2046 contains specific exclusions for States and Indian Nations who do not allow certain types of gambling. Those States and Nations could notify the Federal Government that they wish to "opt out" with respect to some or all forms of gambling. It would then be up to the Internet Gambling Companies to sort state-by-state, and disallow each type of gambling prohibited in the individual states.
So, in theory, if you lived in a state that allowed card rooms but not craps, you might be allowed only to play in certain parts of the website.
The Act is clearly an attempt to allign U.S. laws with the World Trade Organization's latest ruling--that the U.S. Internet Gambling Laws are an unfair restriction upon free trade. But how will it reconcile with states that have a state-run monopoly on certain forms of gambling such as the Texas Lottery? Texas would presumably opt out of allowing Internet Lotteries since Texas citizens cannot run a lottery. But this still runs afoul of free trade.
In addition, the sponsor's justification for the Act--to remove the government's intrusion upon individual freedoms--is wholly lost when some states will allow internet gambling and others will opt out. What happens to the individual freedoms of those in the opt out states? Texas would most likely opt out since casino gambling is not legal here. What happens to my individual freedoms, Barney?
Another problem is that the bill codifies a potential 5 year imprisonment penalty for an online company allowing a prohibited form of gambling in a state that opted out of that type of gambling. Prior to the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, the U.S. could only try to prosecute online gambling under the old vague, Wire Act. Then, at least the online gambling operators could claim the law was to vague to enforce and that it made no sense to apply it against them because gambling is not really illegal under Federal Law. Furthermore, they could argue that the U.S. had no right to prosecute them since they were not located in the U.S.
Mr. Frank's Bill will make it clear that the online gambling companies must screen out the players or face jail time. Moreover, because they have agreed to submit to U.S. jurisdiction, they will have no way to claim that U.S. laws do not apply to them as foreign companies. They will be, in effect, taking on a legal liability they simply should not legally have to.
In summary, it seems to me that the Bill neither achieves its stated purpose--protecting individual freedoms--nor it's substantial purpose--to comply with the WTO ruling. Furthermore, it will take away the defenses of online gambling companies that have allowed them to extend their sites to all Americans in the past.
With sanctions looming on the horizon, the U.S. must either repeal the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act or redraft it to comply with the WTO ruling. Repealing it gets us out of hot water with the WTO and back to where we were before. Replacing it with another law that violates our WTO agreements simply does not make sense.

The 2007 Legislative Session Recap

2007-07-17T05:33:00.000-07:00

The 2007 legislative session ended with no new gambling bills passing. Norma Chavez' Indian Gaming bill receives the prize for best effort. Her bill made the House floor and was voted on. Unfortunately, the vote ended in a tie 66-66 which equals a loss by one vote.

Second place goes to the Texas Poker PAC's bill to legalize poker which was set for consideration but, due to a shortage of time, never got a chance to be voted on.

Third place goes to Chris Shields and the Texas Gaming Commission for their heavily funded bill to create 12 Casinos in Texas that died in committee.

This is the closest a gambling bill has come to passing in a long time. We are hopeful that the door is opened wide enough so that 2009 will bring about the freedom to gamble in Texas again.

Thank you to all of those who supported the battle.

Antigua vs U.S. - The Online Gambling War

2007-07-04T15:29:00.000-07:00

The U.S. was found to be in violation of our free trade agreement by the World Trade Organization. Did our government, with honor and dignity, admit their wrong and agree to comply with our obligations? No. Instead the Bush Administration said "we quit" and stormed off like a child who didn't get his way.

That's right. The U.S. has refused to play by the rules it agreed to and is claiming that the U.S. didn't really understand the full extent of the agreement. Whine, whine, whine.

Now, not only Antigua, but many countries from the U.K. have moved for sanctions against the U.S. for the U.S.'s refusal to comply with our part of the bargain.

Come on George, didn't we get in enough trouble when you refused to honor the United Nations decision that we couldn't attack Iraq for no apparent reason? Now we're going to give the finger to the World Trade Organization too?

Great..We are walking away from the organizations we have spent years upon years telling every other country they had to comply with to prevent a world of disorder and chaos.

I hope every major corporation in the U.S. is ok with the rest of the world no longer having any obligation to honor our copyright and patent laws--since that is likely to be the sanction imposed.

Way to go George.

Antigua vs U.S. World Trade Organization Rules Against U.S. in Online Betting Case

2007-01-28T06:25:00.000-08:00

Score one for David, the giant takes a stone!
Last year, Antigua filed a case with the WTO against the U.S. in relation to the U.S. blocking foreign companies from taking U.S.online bets on horseracing. The claim is based on the same law used to prohibit online gambling.
The WTO has now ruled in favor of Antigua. This opens the door for Antigua to impose trade sanctions. Previously they threatened to dishonor and no loner enforce U.S.copyright, trademark and patent laws as a retaliatory sanction. Can you imagine how cheap we will be able to get pirated software, music and other products soon due to the U.S.' war on online gambling?
A final ruling is expected in two weeks on the case, but this ruling is a huge blow. This could open the door to challenges to the U.S. internet gaming ban by other larger countries. The EU has already indicated they have an interest in the outcome of this case.
No doubt, with recent developments in the U.S. the EU will take an even greater interest. Just this week the Department of Justice issued subpoenas to the american branches of four foreign banks. These banks, including Deutschbank, were underwriters of several online gaming companies that went public on the London Stock Exchange.

A Bullet Dodged

2006-12-30T14:03:00.000-08:00

The game was 2-5 blind, PL ROE (Round of Omaha, Round of Hold'em).
I'm dealt Kh-Jh-Qc-Qd. I limp in.
A tight player raises preflop to $30 from the button. The thought crosses my mind, 'he only raises with all face - big pair hands.'
4 people see the flop.
The flop comes A-Q-4. I check, the other callers check, button bets out $125.00.
I am the sole calller.
As I call, he utters loud enough for me to hear him across the table..."that's trouble."
The turn card is a 9.
I check, he bets $250.
After considerable thought, I fold.
His comment was a tell. During previous hands, I'd never seen him comment about a hand...or even talk during a hand, until then. Rocks are paranoid when they do not have the nuts. He would have never uttered a word without the nuts.
Also, his actions were a tell. Rocks rarely bet the turn in Omaha without the nuts--they are paranoid about being sandbagged by sets--unless they can beat a set.

After I folded, he, in stereotypical rock form, showed his aces before he took down the pot.

12 Casinos in Texas = 300,000 in College Scholarships

2006-12-25T20:41:00.000-08:00

12 Casinos in Texas = 300,000 College Scholarships
The Texas Gaming Association has proposed a bill to establish 12 casino resorts in Texas that would provide 1.6 billion a year to create 300,000 scholarships. The college scholarships would provide $5,000.00 per year for 4 years to graduating high school seniors to attend Texas schools. What an awsome opportunity for our youth! See article here:
12 casino-resorts in Texas

The gambling increases crime myth

2006-12-06T17:21:00.000-08:00

The Gambling increases crime myth is a con created by conservatives to try to prevent people from having the freedom to gamble. Here is a good article that touches on how this BS argument works:

http://bangordailynews.com/news/t/news.aspx?articleid=143407&zoneid=500

The gist is, there is obviously an increase in people in the are where the casinos are created -- associated with all the new tourism, jobs etc. created by the casino. The studies which show a tiny increase in crime do not take into account all the increase in people in the form of tourists. The crime per capita formulas measure crime against the size of the community. But, community size is based on those living there. It does not account for those who are present as visitors/tourists.

Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free...

Bush vs Antigua Round 1

2006-11-19T12:10:00.000-08:00

With the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act, Georgey scores a blow to world trade. Antigua, home of many internet gaming sites, has now been forced to appeal tot he World Trade Organization. The law, by outlawing only certain types of gaming and only over the internet clearly is an unfair restriction on trade in favor of American businesses.
If the WTO fails to protect Antigua, we can expect them to retaliate by refusing to honor American laws such as copy rights and patents. Wow this means we can expect to get bootleg CDs, DVDs, software...you name it, it is soon to be unprotected from knock-off artists in Antigua. In fact, every terrorist will probably open a knock-off factory there soon to fund their organization by selling knock-offs of U.S. products to the world.

All this to stop people from gaming on the internet...is it really a smart move, George?

2006-10-23T17:59:00.000-07:00

Froma Harrop recent wrote a great article about the underlying motives behind the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act. See Houston Chronicle P B7 10/23/06.
Jim Leach, republican from Iowa, was the primary sponsor in the House of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act. He argued for the bills passage on moral grounds. Indeed he coined the phrase "click your mouse and loose your house."
Iowa is home to 13 non-indian casinos.
Iowa is the birthplace of the "racino" a horse or dog track with slots in it.
According to Ms. Harrop's research, Iowa casinos produced 297 million in tax revinues in 2006 and the state-run lottery produced another 81 million.
Iowa stands to lose a lot of revenue to internet gambling.

But according to republican rep. Jim Leach, gambling is immoral. Who is protecting morals and who is protecting money?

When will the Christian Coalition wake up and realize they are backing a bunch wolves in sheep's clothing?

What do 920,000 and 40 million people have in common?

2006-10-03T20:05:00.000-07:00

Answer: A darn good reason to vote out the republican government.

Partygaming has announced that they will be forced to block out 920,000 accounts from U.S. citizens due to the recently passed Unlawful Internet Gambling Prohibition Act.

According to the Poker Players Alliance, there are 40 million poker players in the U.S.

40,920,000 votes for a Democrat president, Democrat Senators and Democrat Representatives might send a message to our Republican-controlled government that we are tired of having our rights trampled on.

Porn not Poker!

2006-10-03T19:42:00.000-07:00

So the Republicans have now passed a law banning banks from processing payments to gambling sites on the internet. Gambling is not illegal under Federal Law, so the justification is that it is possible for minors to enter false information and gamble.

Really? Then why have we not banned banks from making payments to internet pornography sites? There are sites out there with nude children, beastiality and all sorts of filth. Minors can acess these if they can access gambling sites.

Which is more morally corrupt: A) Little Johnny gaining access to play poker on his own limited bank account, or; B) little Johnny gaining access to chicks with donkeys etc...

If you look at the act passed, it would not have been hard to word it as "gambling and pornography" prohibition. In fact, simply adding the words "and pornography" here and there would accomplish it!

So why didn't the Republicans do this?

Multiple Choice Answer:

a) There are no land-based porn sites pumping campaign contributions into Washington.

b) There are no federally-taxed indian reservation porn operations to be protected.

c) Paypal and credit cards do not protest transfers to porn sites (in fact eBay--Paypal's owner--allows the sale of porn on it's website), so they will not grease the politicians in order to hurt competitors like Netteller and Firepay.

d) It's not about morals or what is best for the country, it's all about the benjamins $$$.

e) All of the above.

If you correctly selected choice "e" please get off your duff and go vote these rats out of office.

Internet Gambling Prohibition Act - Big Brother is Watching

2006-08-14T20:09:00.000-07:00

A law has worked it's way through the House and is up for consideration in the Senate. The law will prohibit internet gambling at the federal level with criminal penalties. Does anyone else see a problem with this? Like, perhaps, gambling is not illegal at the federal level?

Federal lands such as Indian reservations are fair game for casinos since, of course, the taxes go straight to the federal government. Federal waters, such as every major fricking river and ocean is ok for gambling boats...because the tax revenues go to the federal government.

States can run lotteries themselves or allow any and all forms of gambling within their boarders.

But a company, in a foreign country, cannot operate an internet gambling site because someone in the U.S. can gamble on the site.

hmmm...gambling is not illegal in the host country and it is not illegal in the U.S. under federal law. So how is it that the U.S. government feels they can police the world and rid it of the 'evils' of gambling on the internet?

Simple, we justify it by saying the Wire Act prohibits anything that might allow gambling over a wire since there is no regulation to ensure the site checks the persons I.D. The justification? A minor might get hold of a credit card (a rare one that transfers to gambling sites) and place an underage wager....even though there may be no age limit in the country where the site is located.

So what's the big deal you say? This act will force banks to discontinue doing business with intermediaries who could transfer funds to a gambling site. Think about it. Under the Act, banks can be liable if they allow a money transfer to an intermediary who transfers the funds to a gambling site. Do you think banks are going to try to police who the intermediaries send money to? It would be too costly. Ban them all and there is no extra cost to the bank. Firepay, Netteller...but why stop there?

Paypal thinks they are immune because they "do not allow transfers to gambling sites." (So immune they think, that they and ebay are pouring money into the campaign funds of politicians who support the Act.) You really think the sites will not learn to disguise their names? But wait a second. What about the problem of retail stores online selling beer over the internet? How do you know that paypal transfer to Bills Online Grocery isn't enabling little Johnny 12-yr-old to order beer and cigarettes delivered to his home while mommy is out? If we are going to regulate on the basis of the possibility of a minor breaking the law, we are going to have to ban all online money transfers, all wire transfers...heck a kid can forge a check and mail it can't he?
Let's regress to a cash-based society! Down with technology and progress Hoorah for Big Brother's foresight and wisdom! Hoorah for bubba da president!

Now, will someone please tell me what country the intelligent people can find amnesty in to escape Big Brother?

Why Legalize Gambling When They Can Tax the Poor?

2006-05-09T20:32:00.000-07:00

Well our glorious Texas Legislature has met and come up with another brilliant solution to the rising property taxes and underpaid teachers issues.

1) Raise the tax on cigarettes. Why the hell not? It's primarily the working man's pleasure and
he don't vote republican anyhow.

2) Expand Franchise taxes to suck in all the little mom-and-pops out there trying to make a
buck. Why let those small-timers have a break? They might accidentally succeed and start
'muscling' their way in on the big business mega corporations' business causing them to only
make 60 gazillion dollars instad of 61 gazillion dollars. What would those big business
republicans do with out that last gazillion? What do you mean give up the beach condo in
Greece?????

3) Raise franchise taxes. The businesses will pass it along to the consumers so legislators can
claim they did us a favor by lowering property taxes while they really stuck it to us by raising
our cost of living. Woohoo thank you government. My butt cheeks are posed and ready so
stick it to me again, baby!

4) Increase the tax on used cars to a set minimum standard rate. Nobody but the poor folk buys
used cars anyway so lets squeeze'em til they bleed dry!

Man isn't life grand when big business interests control the House and Senate in Texas?

And what of the gambling issue? Not this session...the republicans vested to much time into conning the religious right into believing that the big business party is on the side of moral right.

Lets see...the republicans philosophy is to tax the poor, give tax breaks to the rich (big business) and it will "trickle down" to the poor. They also want to do away with welfare and social programs.

the democrats philosophy is to tax the rich at a higher rate than the poor (since they have more to give) and to create social programs for the needy.

Which sounds closer to Jesus' philosophy?
help your fellow man ...or...every man for himself?
give to the needy... or... give to the greedy?

The rich controlling our legislature are trickling something down on the poor, but it ain't money.

9ninepoker.com --What A Sham

2006-04-26T17:30:00.000-07:00

I gave 9ninepoker.com a try this week. It is my opinion that that site is a fraud. You be the judge.

I sign up. In about the first 10 minutes I am playing on the site, I am dealt pocket aces in a .50-1.00 blind no limit hold'em game. I limp in in early position.

Someone raises it to $5.00.
I reraise to $9.00 and he calls.
Flop is 10-6-8. two clubs and a heart.
I bet out about $20.00
The guy calls.
turn card is an 9s
The guy only has about $40.00 in front of him so I put him all-in
He calls.
The hands are flipped. He has As-Qs.
River card is a J, giving the guy a straight.

Now, who the hell would call that flop for 1/3 of their stack with A-Q?

looking for what? a double gutshot straight?

Who would call the turn for the rest of their stack with a gut-shot straight draw?

The only persons who would chase that would be either 1) someone who is criminally stupid and made of money or 2) someone who knows what is coming...i.e. a shill.

I think they should change their name to nein nein poker. As in no way in hell should you give them your money.

Anyone else had a similar experience with 9ninepoker.com?

Vegas Trip

2006-04-15T19:38:00.000-07:00

So I made the pilgrimage to Vegas recently. Now there's a place that has seen alot of change. I never thought he day would come where you couldn't find a Prime Rib buffet for 5.95 on the strip. It's here. 90% of the strip is owned by three companies. Harrahs has the whole block across from Cesars and Cesars.

Poker tournaments are now a dime a dozen out there. 99% of them are No Limit Hold'em.

Cesar's has a nice daily tournament. $80.00 buy-in with one $50.00 add-on. The rounds are 40 min each. It's a long one, but it gives you a chance to relax and play w/o the blinds chomping away at you constantly.

The weekend action is good. Cash games are full of regulars during the weekdays. Some evenings the Imperial Palace manages to put together a $100.00 max/min buy-in no limit hold'em game. It's a great fishing pond.

Answer to You Make the Call AhKh

2006-03-23T17:58:00.000-08:00

Recap: The blinds are 1-2. No Limit Texas Holdem. I have about $175.00 in front of me.
I am holding Ah Kh in the little blind.
4 people limp ahead of me.
I raise to $12.00.
I get 2 callers.
The flop: Js 8h 5h I bet $30.00. 2nd player folds, 3rd player raises to $75.00 and has enough chips to cover my stack.
How do you play that hand:

My answer: Move all-in unless you knw your opponent to be someone who only raises with a set.

Reason:

First ask, what are the pot odds?

$12 x 4 = $48.00 preflop
On flop $30.00 plus $75.00 = %105.00
Total: $153.00

It costs me $45.00 more to call

45:153 = pot odds slightly higher than 3:1 or 33.33%

What are the odds of winning?

If your opponent has:

AJ?
KJ, QJ or J10?
two pair (J8)?
a set?

(Use my chart at: http://www.legalizetexasgambling.com/TexasGamblingOdds.htm)

Assuming your opponent holds no hearts, your outs are:

AhKh vs AJo = 3 kings plus 9 hearts = 12 outs = 45% chance of winning

AhKh vs KJ, QJ or J10 3 kings plus 3 aces plus 9 hearts = 15 outs = 54.1% chance

Two pair (J8) = 8 hearts = 31.5%

Set = 8 hearts = 31.5%

(Note if your opponent holds 1 heart your odds with drop 3-5 percent.)

Even in your worse case scenario, you are moving in on a hand that the pot odds are about equal. There is a good chance, you are moving in with a hand that the pay out beats the odds laid. And, of course, you can also win if your opponent folds.

Lets Talk Religion and Gambling

2006-03-13T22:57:00.000-08:00

Some of you may find this surprising, but I am a Christian. Even more surprising to some, I am a Baptist--although I do not agree every position the Southern Baptist Convention takes.

I attend church regularly. (But, to quote a great pastor, that makes me no more a Christian than going into a garage makes me a car. I agree with that 100%.)

I volunteer every Sunday to check in chilren in the nurseryat the church I attend. I attend church Sunday morning and I return to the church Sunday evening for small group bible study. I also co-teach a bible study at my place of work and I work for a Christian company. But most importantly of all, I love the Lord, Jesus Christ.

So how can you be for legalization for gambling, you say?

I challenge anyone to show me where in the Bible it says you shall not gamble.

It is not there. What it says in the Bible, plain and simple, is that you shall place no idols before the Lord thy God.

What does that mean?

It means that you shall not place your faith in anything (including gambling), other that Jesus Christ. I believe this firmly. (If you don't and would like to know more about it, please email me.) It applies to money, sex, alcohol, drugs, material things, work and yes, even gambling.

I do not believe that there is any action that is, in itself, inherently a sin. Sin is about motive. It's about where your heart is when you act. Just because you bought a lottery ticket when the jackpot hit 67 million does not mean you sinned. If you put every dime you had into lottery tickets, such that your future depended upon the outcome, then yes, you have put your faith in a false idol and you have sinned.

Last time I checked, Jesus never once preached about outlawing conduct in which a person can engage in a sinful manner. Face it, a person can be an active servant in his church, but if his motive for serving is to bring notariety (glory) to himself, then his actions are sinful in spite of the good things that may come of his actions. Should we therefore, outlaw serving in a church?

God created man with free will. He gave man choices. He gave man the choice to do actions which can be done in both sinful and unsinful manners. Who are we to step in the place of God and say "man cannot do this action in any manner, we are taking away that choice?" "You cannot gamble under any circumstances because it can be done in a sinful manner, God must of messed up when he gave you that freedom." Doesn't fly, does it?

God knew what he was doing when he gave man the choice. Please stop taking away my God-given choices. Legalize Texas Gambling. If you do not want to do it, don't. If a brother does it sinfully, counsel him.

God bless.

paul@legalizetexasgambling.com

Legalize it

2006-03-13T22:51:00.000-08:00

We should legalize casinos in Texas. It would help the economy. It would be a great source of tax revenues (about 2 billion a year minimum). If legislated properly, it will lower property taxes while increasing school funding.

And the greatest thing of all is, if you don't want to gamble because you feel it is unrightous, unfair, unjust, unrelgious or you just aren't any good at it, you don't have to go to the casino!

But don't impose your desire not to gamble on the rest of us who have the guts, skills and/or desire to enjoy it.

Omaha

2006-03-13T22:39:00.000-08:00

I know, I know, the new craze is no limit hold'em because everyone has seen it played on the World Poker Tour and some nobody won it a few years back so any Tom, Dick or Harry must have a chance right?

Ok, this post is not for the new player...that is, the guy who started playing in the last three or four years because every-f*ing one else was doing it or you saw it on TV.

This post is for the real player. The player who was playing before poker on ESPN (yes, even ESPN 2) was around....

Pot limit Omaha is the game of champion poker players. It requires more skill, more ability and more talent than hold'em (no limit or pot limit) will ever require. Take any good hold'em player and put him at a pot limit omaha table. if he can't hang, he ain't squat.

It's about odds. It's about reads. It's about excellent poker play.

I've won more money at a pot limit round-of-each game by destroying top notch hold'em players who couldn't hang with the omaha round.

If you want to be a top-notch poker player, learn pot limit omaha.

Bye the way, if you are interested in a pot limit round of each game in Cypress Texas, no rake, no tips, byoe...respond to this message.

Bye Bye Joe

2006-03-09T14:53:00.000-08:00

Celebration time, baby!

Anti-gambling hardliner Joe Nixon lost in the primaries!

Way to go Texas!

Joe Nixon R for Senate Dist. 7

2006-03-04T20:45:00.000-08:00

I recently attended a "meet-the-candidates" function where this guy and his two republican primary opponents and the democratic opponent were are present.

Two Words: Conservative Hardliner.

Anti-gambling, anti-working man. Let the church run the country...freedom of choice is just an incidential side-effect of democracy to this man.

I do not care if you are republican or democrat, vote this guy out. Do not let him win the primaries.

He will be tough to beat. Nixon is a polished politician. Kisses all the right babies etc....

Get out there and vote, gamblers!

You Make the Call - Poker Hand AhKh NLH

2006-03-01T19:07:00.000-08:00

The blinds are 1-2. No Limit Texas Holdem.
I have about $175.00 in front of me.
I am holding Ah Kh in the little blind.
4 people limp ahead of me. I raise to $12.00. (Those of us who remember when pot limit was 'the big game' and no limit cash games were regulated to private games or Sunday nights at the stratosphere will know what I mean when I say pot limit habbits die hard.) I get 2 callers.

The flop: Js 8h 5h I bet $30.00.

2nd player folds
3rd player raises to $75.00 and has enough chips to cover my stack.

How do YOU play it and why?

The Evils of Gambling

2006-02-26T20:54:00.000-08:00

So, I've been thinking. The critics all say gambling is evil. It creates addicts, destroys homes, bankrupts people. Maybe they are right. Maybe gambling is to blame.

I mean, the individual who goes to the gambling hall had no choice did he? The moment he entered the door (by force) he was sucked toward the loud, obnoxious slot machine that kept whispering...feed me.

How could the man, in good conscience, not put a quarter in it? Then another and another.... He has no responsibility for his actions does he? The first moment he gambled, he became physically addicted. His body simply could not survive without the...?...in his system.

There is a question mark there, because, of course, there is nothing in his system. Gambling is not addictive. An addiction is something your body becomes physically dependent upon and cannot function without.

So why do they call it an addiction? Perhaps, because critics can draw associations to drugs and give it a bad rap? Or is it because it gives the jack-ass who throws away his money in stupidity an excuse? Perhaps, because it is....evil.

Really? Evil?
Sure, it causes bankruptcy. You say.

But wait, I have been gambling for 14 plus years...I'm not bankrupt. I'm actually quite well-off.

People who want to ban gambling because it "causes" bankruptcy and "causes" marriages to be destroyed are fools.

Thousands of people die every year due to automoble collisions...under the fools logic, cars cause automobile accidents. We should ban cars.

Aids is spread by sex. We should ban having sex.

Terrorists kill people with guns...we should ban all guns.

People get fat by eating so we should ban all eating!

...or, we could all just take responsibility for our own actions.