Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="dj11, post: 1806816, member: 13851"] Well, I did it. I sat thru the whole 'hearing'. Interesting at least. The whole thing was about the Bill in question. Most of the Congressional members came with a positive agenda (IMHO) suggesting they were trying to get this bill passed. A few showed a negative agenda, suggesting they are looking for reason to nix the whole thing. But even they looked like they can be swayed. That swaying will obviously happen out of the public eye. The 'Witnesses' mostly presented themselves well. The Native American was the least persuasive. The bot guy was speaking for Consumer Protections. It is a concern we all have, just he got more air time than that part of the big picture probably deserves. The problem gambler guy spoke using statistics, and did not make them clear. He spoke well, but right after he said problem gambler constitute maye .5-1% of all gamblers, he said that 60% of problem gamblers commit some sort of white collar crime to finance their gambling addictions. 60% of 1% was not mentioned. I hope the Subcommitee people realize that, they have to have some brain right? The Fair Play gal was probably the best advocate. Her stance is verification of adults is the key. Since it is nearly impossible to verify that a kid is a kid, then we must be ready and able to verify an adult is an adult. There was a question near the end about offshore sites being welcomed in under any new legislation. Put in a way that got all the witnesses to say that they should not. Implication is for sure bye bye PokerStars. Al Demato, the PPA guy, tried to clarify things after that question, but ?????????? Long, but if we are truly interested, then viewing the whole hearing is recommended.. It resists a true Cliff Notes quicky. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us