GAMBLERS AUTONOMOUS In 2002, more than 50 million people in America went into a casino to gamble. It is estimated that nearly $34 billion was wagered on the lottery, either on a state or multi-state level. According to all responsible sources, more money is spent on gambling in this country than movies, music, and sports combined. The fact is, the American people love to gamble. Why? Because we are, by nature, risk-takers. That has been inherent in the American spirit, and was a driving force behind a group of revolutionaries declaring their independence from the British crown more than 225 years ago. There is an incredible demand for the product that is "gambling". And in many areas of this country, there are enterprises established to satisfy that demand. Yet, the gambling industry and gamblers in general are treated as if they are engaging in an activity that is immoral and wrong. And at every turn, there are movements designed to restrict the rights of citizens to gamble. The United States government has seen it necessary to inject itself into the moral fray - the latest an attempt, spearheaded by Arizona Senator John Kyl, to prohibit U.S. citizens from engaging in games of chance and skill over the internet; and by John McCain, whose idea of addressing corruption in college athletics is to prohibit legal sportsbooks, who actually serve as a wtachdog against fixes, to take wagers on it. Legalized gambling is not the subject that's on everyone's lips. Nor is it a catch-all solution for this nation's ills. But it's indeed important for many reasons - primarily because it is often the most viable alternative state governments turn to when their outrageous spending and substandard fiscal management have embroiled them in a budget crisis. As a result, every year there are a collection of states where ballot initiatives pertaining to gambling are introduced, whether it is to legalize the activity or expand that which is already legal. The initiatives bring forth a tremendous amount of emotion on the part of the public and interest on the part of the press. It also causes infighting among different groups in the gambling industry. Often, these struggles will pit land-based casinos against cruise ships, non-Indian casinos against Indian casinos, pari-mutuels against land-based casinos. On the federal level, land-based casinos oppose internet casinos. These conflicts have an economic basis - one faction of the industry always seems to find itself threatened by others. What people in the gambling industry seem to lose sight of is that these internal battles only serve to fortify the case of the one common foe all the pro-gambling interests share. That opposition is almost always furnished by the "moral opportunists" - people who are dedicated to imposing their own value systems on the freedom of others, who usually come with a hidden agenda that is largely unchecked by the media. They misrepresent statistics about compulsive gamblers and the social costs of treating them, and construct anti-gambling ads (such as one connected to a recent Maine referendum which showed small children pulling slot machine levers) which are an insult to the sensitivity of any reasonable person. They are also hypocritical, in that they think nothing of teaming up with various partisan gambling forces to defeat gambling measures where they deem it appropriate. Where is the principle in THAT? As libertarian thinkers; indeed, as United States citizens, it is incumbent upon us to contest this "over-moralization" of America, and the gambling arena is certainly one place to fight that battle. As such, we find some very strong common ground with ALL factions of the gambling industry. So it goes without saying that the industry and its customers, as a whole, should be a partner with us in the fight for individual freedom. It is certainly appropriate for the Personal Choice Party to cultivate this group. According to a recent USA Today story, 52% of casino players and 67% of sports bettors earn $40,000 a year or more. It is well-known that companies involved in the industry donate money to politicians and campaigns, and have the financial means to do so. In fact, federal campaign contributions from the casino industry increased 447% during the decade of the 1990's, according to Tom Bell of the CATO Institute. And Native Americans are becoming very active political players as well, making themselves a factor in many local and state races, contributing $6.8 million to campaigns in 2002 - up from less than $2000 in 1990. To take it to the next level, tribes have been sponsoring some of their own to be trained as potential candidates for political office. Undoubtedly, Indian gaming interests are the impetus for this surge in political activity. And Native Americans are independent of mind, which means they are less likely to be driven by the conventions of the two-party system. The point is, there is an intersection at which gambling and politics most definitely meet. And as defenders of freedom, we need to be there. And part of the rationale for this vice-presidential campaign is to provide a mechanism from which to launch the single-issue appeal that is encompassed here. I believe we can - and should - be a party that, unlike Republicans or Democrats, identifies itself with the industry and the concept of "gambling" in general as a matter of personal choice and freedom. In other words, we WILL take the lead on this issue. GAMBLERS AUTONOMOUS is being established to address this objective. The goal of GAMBLERS AUTONOMOUS is: 1) To support gamblers' rights 2) Introduce people to the party by way of this issue 3) Recruit members who share our beliefs in freedom and self-determination 4) Appeal to and assist those who may find those rights in danger on one or more fronts, and who are involved in the business of satisfying the consumer demand for gambling. 5) Fight against the legislation of morality wherever possible 6) Educate legislators, the public, and the press, as to the real truth surrounding gambling as an activity of choice 7) To identify ballot issues regarding gambling, campaign for them, and put the "stamp" of our campaign on those victories To accomplish what we want, it is critical that the PC Party establishes that it is aware of the concerns of these interests, and that it will be supportive of those interests. The message needs to have a consistency to it. And that message is: * That legalized gambling is a healthy, perfectly acceptable form of entertainment for adults, is a matter of personal choice, and an industry comprised of good corporate citizens which provides utility by satisfying consumer demand perhaps better than any other industry in America. * That legalized gambling provides jobs and dollars for the economy, helps to facilitate personal freedom, does not look to bleed the public in the way of ridiculous tax abatements or absurd forms of corporate welfare, and can be a boon to any state government that permits it, taxes it, and acts responsibly in managing the revenue derived from it. * That regulation - within tight limits, of course - can vertebrate the industry and the concept of "gambling" in general, insuring more perceived confidence on the part of the public and presenting gambling as a legitimate form of entertainment, not unlike any other form of entertainment. * That for this reason, limited regulation can serve to further a greater libertarian concept and purpose. * That with regard to internet gaming, we should endeavor to embrace technology, rather than fight it, because not only is it not going away, it is not taking a backward step. * That MORE PERSONAL FREEDOM BRINGS MORE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, which means that people who choose to gamble and act irresponsibly - for example, in a manner in which they will hurt themselves or their family - have to face the consequences of their actions on a personal level, and such consequences should not serve to penalize the vast majority of people who DO choose to act responsibly. * That politicians and religious leaders, both of whom have their own agenda, do not have the right to make personal choices for people when it comes to disposing of their property in whatever way they wish. * That federalizing the prohibition of gambling may indeed be unconstitutional. In terms of the message, GAMBLERS AUTONOMOUS will not necessarily take positions for one specific segment of the industry against another. That's a lobbyist's job. Rather, we defend the personal choice of gambling, and support those who wish to operate in the free market to satisfy that personal choice, as long as they are not committing thievery or fraud, and are not otherwise violating the rights of individuals. More details on why I am using gambling as a signature issue