Politics/Economics

Lots of people would not even consider it, much less the politicians of today, who are not only trying to portray themselves as saints, but are also trying to bring the game industry down by refusing to consider poker a game of skill. However, they certainly cannot erase history, and it would be good for some of them to refresh their memories about the historical relationship between poker and politics.

In a time of controversial enforcement acts against the gaming industry, gambling has become a taboo, even a felony in one state, and money-transferring companies are now banning U.S. players for fear of getting busted and severely punished, like the recent Neteller case.

Even when some politicians and lawyers question and condemn the recent laws to the point of causing a lawsuit from attorney Lee Rousso against the state of Washington for turning gambling into a felony, most people in the Senate and other political circles declare themselves enemies of the gaming industry.

The question is: why now, if playing has always been a favorite past time within the political arena? Why not keep it silent, like it has always been?

It’s a known fact that ex-presidents and important political figures have been inclined to spending their leisure time playing golf, poker, drinking and partying with their peers. What are our current politicians trying to do with all this banning and censure? Are they indirectly saying they are ashamed of their political ancestors for their gambling?

Let’s refresh their memory. There’s a huge list of political personalities in the poker “black list,” including legendary figures like President Warren Harding and Secretary of State Daniel Webster, and more recent personalities, like president Nixon and presidential candidate Barack Obama.

According to presidential records, Warren Harding “played poker at least twice a week, and once gambled away an entire set of White House china. His advisors were nicknamed the ‘Poker Cabinet’ because they joined the president in his poker games.” Other sources even say “he was an ineffectual and indecisive leader who played poker while his friends plundered the U.S. treasury.”

President Harry Truman used to combine alcohol with poker in his long boat vacations, and it is said that “while he told most reporters his main goal was to get some sleep and drink some Kentucky bourbon, he also spends hours playing poker (pay $500 dollars to enter the game).” Some of his favorite poker guests were Speaker Rayburn and Chief Justice Vinson.

Richard Nixon learned to play poker during World War II, and it’s reported that “he became such as dedicated player that he once turned down a chance to have dinner with Charles Lindbergh when it conflicted with a [poker] game. He also won a great deal of money and used his winnings partially to finance his first congressional campaign.”

Secretary of State Daniel Webster, the greatest speaker in American politics, “was a well known poker player in his time [….] Kentucky Senator Henry Clay, a notorious gambler, was Webster’s friend, political ally and favorite poker opponent. They played high limit Draw and it wasn’t uncommon for the pots to reach thousands of dollars.”

Presidential candidate Barack Obama crowns this list, as his taste for poker is the most contemporary proof that politics have always gone hand in hand with poker: “’When he was a young state politician in Illinois, Barack Obama played his cards right. He had the stone face,’ said Senator Terry Links, who hosted weekly poker games at his home. ‘He didn’t stay in hands if he didn’t think he had a chance of winning.’”

There are many more politicians associated with poker, like President Dwight Eisenhower, Vice President Hannibal Hamlin, U.S. Senator Henry Clay, Presidential Advisor Clark Clifford and Justice Thurgood Marshall, to mention some.

Poker is much more closely linked to people who reach the top ranks of success in society than chess is, due to the fact that these personalities found poker more intellectually stimulating. Bill Gates, avid poker player while in college, once expressed to his college roommate that he “believed [poker] marathons were at least as productive and intellectually stimulating as his time spent in class.”

Maybe the answer to gaming persecution lies in what Radley Balko commented last year in Reason Magazine, “I think the main motivation for the bill was simply the moral aversion to gambling held by its chief sponsors – Goodlatte, Kyl, and Leach – and a desire to impose that moral rectitude on the rest of the country.”

Will current politicians achieve their unfounded moralistic quest? We can only hope that the American leaders elected in 2008 realize that these policies represent turning their backs on their political role models, the ones that built the America of today.

{ 0 comments }