Tuesday, Oct. 24, 2006 | 7:13 a.m.
WASHINGTON - Could a cornerstone of Republicans' American Values Agenda - the just passed law to ban Internet gambling - come back to bite the party on Nov. 7?
That's the prognosis of poker-playing scholar Charles Murray, who warned in a recent newspaper opinion piece of the political damage Republicans may face from the nation's poker-playing masses this fall. An estimated 8 million Americans gamble online.
"We are talking about a lot of people ... who are angry enough to vote on the basis of this one issue, and they blame Republicans," said Murray, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, writing in The New York Times.
The Poker Players Alliance, which fought the bill on Capitol Hill, says Murray is spot on.
The group's president, Michael Bolcerek, said that in catering to the religious right, which pushed Congress for the ban, Republicans have antagonized the party's rank and file who just want to play a few hands online.
Bolcerek said he has been getting a continuous flow of e-mails from Republicans "who say they're going to vote straight Democrat." The group is urging its 120,000 members to vote - and posted congressional voting records at its Web site.
"We believe it was a miscalculation by the Republican Party to assume these people won't go to the polls and vote on this issue," Bolcerek said in an interview.
Online gambling has grown into a massive pastime, although not exactly a legal one. The religious right has pushed to ban the practice for years, without luck, saying it is harmful to family life.
But just as Washington lawmakers were preparing to adjourn for fall elections, Congress passed the gambling ban by tacking it onto a massive port security bill members couldn't turn down. President Bush signed the bill at a ceremony just over a week ago.
Now millions of American gamblers are being shut out of popular sites that immediately closed their doors to U.S. players. Murray argued that based on his online talks with poker players, he's willing to bet many of the "outraged millions" are Republicans and Reagan Democrats. He was not immediately available for comment.
"This law all by itself could add a few more Democratic congressional seats in the fall elections," he wrote.
A spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., who had made the bill a priority, doubts its passage will hurt the GOP or depress Republican turnout.
The bill's passage comes after other big-ticket values agenda items such as bans on gay marriage and flag desecration failed over summer.
"I am not sure how enforcing something that was already illegal is bad for either political party," Frist spokeswoman Carolyn Weyforth said. "This bill just put in place a mechanism to stop those that were ignoring our existing laws."
Members of Congress are often graded on how well their votes match their rhetoric on issues. Now a veterans group is ranking representatives on how well they support the troops.
The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America say fewer than one-fourth of the members of Congress earned A's in its survey. The group reviewed 300 votes since September 2001.
Nevada's Democratic representatives Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Shelley Berkley both scored A-minus. But the state's Republicans didn't crack the honor roll.
Republican Sen. John Ensign earned a D-minus, joining 15 percent of the House and Senate members earning failing grades. One vote that brought the group's criticism was his opposition to an amendment to increase funding for traumatic brain injury research. Ensign's spokesman said the senator supported another piece of legislation that would have provided even greater funding for the research.
However, that amendment failed to be included in a final bill - although senators might revisit the issue later this year, the veterans group said.
Reps. Jon Porter and Jim Gibbons earned C-plus. Like Ensign, they lost marks on their support of the Military Commission Act, which the veterans group opposed for not going far enough to outlaw the torture of military detainees.
Porter responded by outlining other initiatives he has supported to improve the lives of troops and vets, including double-digit budget increases for veterans' medical funding.
"I am proud of my strong support for the veterans of our nation," he said in a statement.
Ensign's spokesman dismissed the group as having an obvious political agenda to discredit Republicans.
"It's a shame they are using war veterans to try to forward their agenda," Ensign spokesman Jack Finn said. The group and the senator clashed earlier this year when representatives of a spin-off PAC showed up at the senator's office demanding an apology for remarks Ensign made about war opponents at the Nevada Republican Party convention.
The survey showed most members of Congress earned a C or better, but the group is targeting anyone below an A.
"This should be a wake-up call for every American who thinks Congress is doing all it can for those who have sacrificed so much," said Paul Rieckhoff, an Iraq war veteran and founder of the group that represents 1,500 active-duty troops. "We should all demand more from our elected officials."
archive
