Posted on 04/22/2011 10:52:58 AM PDT by Winged Hussar
After posting yesterday about the perils of using raffles as campaign fundraisers in Florida, I was contacted by Jessica Robinson - associate general counsel at AFSCME (and perhaps the nation's foremost expert on raffle laws) - who offered more insight into the legalities of raffles.
It is legally impossible to conduct a nationwide raffle, whether the funds are being used for political purposes or not. This, of course, is of great importance, because running an interstate gambling operation that does not comply with the laws in each state in which it is being conducted subjects you to both criminal and civil penalties under the Federal RICO statute.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-GN7_Zo4mY speaks for itself starting at about 0:35, as does http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/dinner/.
Colorado has it’s own set of raffle laws and I assume most if not all other states do.
This is why so many consumer “sweepstakes” warn “void where taxed or restricted.”
This is why they also give you an alternate method of entry that doesn’t require a purchase or payment. Then it’s not technically gambling.
The law applies only when there is someone to enforce it ... and who might that be?
“This is why they also give you an alternate method of entry that doesn’t require a purchase or payment. Then it’s not technically gambling.”
The Obama campaign did not do this until called on the carpet by MN law enforcement, which leaves it with two if not more probably illegal lotteries on its record.
“The law applies only when there is someone to enforce it ... and who might that be?”
If the FEC won’t act on this—and I just sent it a formal notarizes complaint—try the case in the court of public opinion. A good bumper sticker might be, “One U.S. Code for Patrick Patte, Another U.S. Code for Barack Obama” or “What’s the difference between Patrick Patte and Barack Obama? Patte almost went to the Big House while Obama went to the White House.” Patte is a Wilkes-Barre bar owner who got probation for activities related to Internet gambling.
Add that prospective jurors in Internet gambling cases should take into account the fact that it is apparently OK for the President of the United States to run a lottery or raffle over the Internet, so it must be OK for the defendant as well. Federal prosecutors won’t like the glaring “precedent” in the Oval Office that causes jurors to let genuine criminals walk on Internet gambling charges. I am not saying that two wrongs make a right but we can’t have one law for the President and another for everybody else.
Our side’s basic argument should focus on the principle that the President’s blatant disregard for the country’s laws invites universal disrespect for those laws and endangers the foundation of rule of law. Make that a big enough issue starting now, and he’s gone in 2012—maybe in the primary when somebody in his own party uses this issue to show he is unelectable.
I remember when they finally made the change in terms. I was hoping millions of conservatives would enter so the winners could be conservatives who didn't donate a thing.
Do our tax dollars have to pay for this jerks campaigning when there is no other reason for him to say, be in town?
What service did this boobhead provide out in CA other than expose idiot hollywood actors for the numbskulls we already know them to be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.