«

Ms. Duke Goes to Washington

Comments (8)
by , Nov 15, 2007 | 11:15 pm

Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee held the Hearing on Establishing Consistent Enforcement Policies in the Context of Online Wagers. Errr, it was about online gaming.

John Conyers (D-MI) chaired the hearing; he has every potential to be a co-sponsor of one or more of the bills up for consideration in Congress, and he visited the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) convention a few weeks ago.

Robert Wexler and Shelley Berkley, both of whom introduced bills supported by the PPA, spoke at the hearing. And representing the PPA was Annie Duke. Her testimony was excellent, and when confronted by members of Congress like Goodlatte, she held her own.

The video of Annie’s testimony (with the introduction by Conyers) is worth listening to…


Tags: , , , , ,
  • http://pokerati.com/about-us/#danm DanM

    Just watched the vid … and seriously, great job by Annie. (We’ll pretend we didn’t notice that she kept calling the PPA the Poker Players Association, as opposed to the Alliance.)

    Is there more video of her out there being questioned by the members? Would love to see it.

  • http://pokerati.com/?author=117 California Jen

    Here is a link to PPA YouTube videos:

    http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?p=r&user=pokerplayersalliance&page=1

    There are numerous videos of testimony and Q&A sessions from Wednesday. Interesting debate…

  • http://pokerati.com/about-us/#danm DanM

    Thanks for that link, Jen. Totally fascinating stuff. I hope a lot of people click it and watch the various testimonies. Am I just being biased in thinking that our side is clearly winning?

  • http://pokerati.com/?author=117 California Jen

    Honestly, I don’t even truly understand the other side of the argument. People like Goodlatte seem so small-minded, and I don’t understand what’s behind his vendetta. He seems so far removed from mainstream America that it boggles the mind.

    If poker can’t win this fight, this country is more backwards than I thought.

  • http://pokerati.com/about-us/#danm DanM

    Ah, the flaming Cali liberal in you comes out. :)

    But saying you don’t even want to try to understand the other side of the argument makes you sound like someone who is getting it all-in with pocket kings no matter what comes on the flop or how your opponent bets.

  • http://pokerati.com/about-us/#danm DanM

    By the way, it just occurred to me … too late to make a change … but shouldn’t the hedline be:

    Ms. Chips Goes to Washington?

  • http://pokerati.com/?author=117 California Jen

    I can’t deny my flaming liberal side…

    What I meant when I said I don’t understand Goodlatte and those who support anti-gaming legislation is that their point seems to weak – wouldn’t stand up to the pro-gaming side in a college debate. I do understand their side but think it’s a shady argument.

    And in truth, I do have a hard time with the fact that those who claim they want smaller government are the first to dive in and try to regulate people’s personal freedoms. I have difficulties with their side of the story.

  • http://www.michelelewis.com Michele Lewis

    Word Jen!
    Very nice job by Annie, thanks for putting that up.
    She’s a great speaker simply because she does her research and believes in what she’s saying. Honesty goes a long way.