Not to be dismissive of all the good work poker can do, but in Las Vegas, charity tourneys can begin to seem a dime a dozen.

Just about all charity tournaments promise “celebrities”, but few deliver. In the world of big-time charity events that consistently do, you’ve got Ante Up for Africa, the big $5k buy-in event at the WSOP, and, maybe Jennifer Harman’s event for the ASPCA. But one of the best opportunities to play with celebs for a decent price (and a great cause) is at the “All In for CP” 3 charity event, which takes place today at the Venetian at 4 pm PT.

The tournament raises money for the One Step Closer Foundation, an enterprise started by Jacob Zalewski when he was in college. Though the ultimate goal is to find a cure for cerebral palsy, the immediate goal is to allow people with CP to live more normal lives. Many of you who have spent time at the Rio during the last few World Series’ have certainly seen Jacob riding around the halls on his scooter.

This event does not lack in star power, as celebrities have taken down this event in the last two years. First it was actor Mehki Phifer, then last year Simpson’s co-creator Sam Simon won and generously donated the entirety of his winnings. This year’s event will also feature appearances by Shannon Elizabeth, Jennifer Tilly, Montel Williams and WWE Diva Alicia Fox, amongst others, as well as dozens of poker pros including Barry Greenstein, Phil Laak, Dennis Phillips, and Antonio Esfandiari.

As was previously stated this tournament is happening TODAY at 4 PM. Information about the event can be found on Facebook here and on the All In For CP website here. If you’re in the area you should definitely consider heading down and anteing up for this worthy cause.

I’m surprised to see poker people still speculating on the #ReidBill’s chances for bringing the poker industry a Christmas present or leaving us a lump of coal … as if any of us could be more than donkeys in a game where that word alone means something totally different.

The guys at Wicked Chops are saying “two outer” as if they have the same level of expertise as Pokerati. Dudes, we’ve done more than just take a tour of the White House … we ponied up the extra $9 for an audio guide!

(OK, you’re right, I can’t prove that … but if I had a receipt it would be an easier tax deduction for us than you! And true fact: I did ride paddle boats outside the Jefferson Memorial more times during the Carter administration than I saw Star Wars at a drive-in, so …)

Though just semi-experienced at best, I have been down this special-interest road before … where you’ve got a bill on the table but are running up against a semi-arbitrary not-clearly defined session clock — go Texas poker ’09! Which is why Pokerati is setting its line for #Reidbill passage firmly at somewhere between 8 and 88 percent.

Book it. We should know for sure by Tuesday or Monday or Wednesday-ish.

Though no one in the so-called “poker industry” has much if any political experience prior to Harry Reid’s current term … some poker-biz donkey-pols have learned a thing or two along the way to get us here. For a little perspective, here’s “the Professor” Howard Lederer learnin’ us some Political Science 101 last year at a high-society charity tourney in Washington DC, providing an overview of the game at hand … particularly for small-time players hoping to satellite into a bigger Beltway event:

If this was the message that got out around the Beltway and beyond, you’d think we coulda had the UIGEA Redux done years ago … and would already be gearing up for the relaunch of an American-friendly Sunday Millions in the coming new year. Of course that woulda required legislation that woulda had some 14 interested parties agreeing, “yeah, I can live with that”.

Check it out … read the whole story, but yesterday’s hedline in Slate magazine pretty much says it all, no?

Don’t Hate the Player—or the Game
Sure, Harry Reid’s push to legalize online poker is a favor to the casinos that helped get him re-elected. But it’s also good policy.

Still learning how the politics game works along with the rest of the poker world here … but maybe “good policy” is a red flag to lawmakers who prefer passing stuff that isn’t?

With all the talk over the past few days about the Harry Reid Poker Bill we take a listen and bring you up to date on some of the podcast that have discussed the topic.

The Poker Edge:

Phil Gordon and Andrew Feldman welcomed John Pappas of the PPA to the show this week to discuss the Reid Bill. John stated that the PPA has been in negotiations with Senator Reid and other key Senate leaders to include an Internet gaming bill during the lame duck session. He stated that if a bill is not passed before the end of the session that players can expect to see more state legislation to be introduced. The crew also discussed how the proposed 15-month ban will play out, one of the key points was that there will more than likely be a site that chooses to be the renegade and provide a service to the US market since it will be lucrative for them due to a limited market. You can listen to the entire podcast on ESPN.com, or download it directly via iTunes.

Final Table Poker Radio:

Paul Harris and Dennis Phillips discuss how the proposed 15-month ban will affect those players that use their poker winnings to supplement their normal income. They also discuss how different Internet poker will look once the US market opens back up and how this bill will not only affect the US but also the foreign market in the future. The crew also discuss the short and long term affects that this bill will have on not only online but the live poker world. If you want to listen to the entire show or catch up on previous show you can either visit The Final Table site or check it out on iTunes.

Two Plus Two Pokercast:

The guys over at Two Plus Two discussed the Reid bill with Rich Muny from the PPA, the discussion on the bill starts at the 1 hour 16 minute mark. Rich discusses how much the PPA was involved in the writing of the bill, he stated that one of the biggest provisions that the PPA fought for was to keep the players from being fined have legal action taken against them for playing since the UIGEA was first introduced. They also get SteveD from Pokerstars on to discuss the Isildur1 signing, the main focus was about the weekly 2,500 hand HU challenge. Players can either buy directly into the 4-table match or can satellite into the challenge. The discussion turned into wether or not a reveal will be made at the PCA coming up in January. You can listen to the podcast on the Pokercast site or via iTunes.

AGA just released a statement in support of the “Prohibition of Internet Gambling, Internet Poker Regulation and Strengthening UIGEA Act of 2010″, or, as I like to call it -> the PIG-IPRSUA. Catchy, right?

Surprising? No. Except the time it took for them to come forth with an official press release.

Frank Fahrenkopf, AGA chieftain, had the following to say:

“This is tough law-and-order legislation that puts in place a solid regulatory framework and legal oversight that will prevent illegal activity and protect the estimated 15 million Americans who already are playing poker online. Ours is a unique industry in that it wants tough regulatory control and strict law enforcement oversight, which ensures the integrity of our business and protects consumers. Current online gambling laws do not provide these safeguards, leaving players and the system open to fraud, cheating and other illegal acts.”

“Without this legislation, players will remain unprotected, law enforcement oversight will remain murky, illegal offshore operators will continue to reap billions from U.S. bettors, and the U.S. will continue to lose out on the significant tax revenues and thousands of jobs that could be generated by this already popular activity. The millions of Internet poker players need and deserve the protections of a strong regulatory structure and law enforcement oversight that this legislation would provide.”

Nothing new here.  Yes, consumer protection is a positive.  But what about this (emphasis added)?

The proposed legislation ensures that Federal and State authorities will now have the ability to control what has, until now, been unfettered access to all forms of Internet gambling.

My takeaway?  AGA is letting *everyone* know they are behind this legislative horse.  Gotta wonder what Fahrenkopf and crew think about Jersey, California, and the District of Columbia‘s push to legalize iGambling on their own.

In the exhausting hemming-and-hawing going in both the mainstream and iPoker media, there is only one topic on a bigger heater than when is this effing thing going be over if the #reidbill hand is still live.

Is the “Reid Online Poker” gonna be attached to the tax cut bill, or what?

Politico reported this morning that when “74-page tax cut bill was officially introduced late Thursday, it did not include the poker language.”  But without owning the Las Vegas Sun’s political Ouija board, all I can say is that there is still a chance this could happen.

Reid could still insert the poker legalization into the tax cut bill if additional modifications are made before a final vote is cast sometime next week. Or he could slip the plan into a mammoth $1 trillion omnibus spending bill that has yet to be unveiled but is necessary to keep the government funded through September. Any option is certain to generate backlash from the GOP.

Reid issued a statement to his home state press corps Thursday evening confirming that he is crafting legislation to legalize online poker, framing the effort as a common-sense measure to regulate and tax gambling occurring through offshore companies.

“The legislation I am working on would get our collective heads out of the sand and create a strict regulatory environment to protect U.S. consumers, prevent underage gambling and respect the decisions of states that don’t allow gambling,” he said.

He asserted his bill would ensure “the revenue and jobs from this multibillion-dollar industry will stay where it belongs — here in America.”

Seems like the tax-cut bill and the bazillion dollar CR (continuing resolution) omnibus are still both viable conduits for the #reidbill, but *no one* can truly say at this point how-when-or-if the internet poker legislation will pass.

So take a deep breath and pull up a comfortable chair at the virtual poli-rail, because to quote one fatigued tweeter named @MSauce_-> “The #ReidBill sweat is so swingy.”

From the office of my favorite most powerful* Nevada senator re-elected in 2010 … you know, the guy I voted for, not because we had any sorta official quid pro quo but more as a show of “good faith” from yours truly and Pokerati.com … ending lame duck speculation and negotiation?

* UPDATE: And handsome

Washington, DC – Nevada Senator Harry Reid [yesterday] made the following statement on the online poker bill he is working to pass.

“The online poker bill I am working on is good for the country and for Nevada. Under the status quo, Internet poker is played by millions of Americans every day in an essentially unregulated environment, meaning no protections for minors, no respect for State law, no assurance that games are fair and honest, and no one to turn to if you’re defrauded. Additionally, neither federal nor State governments collect a dime of revenue from this multibillion dollar Internet poker industry.

“The legislation I am working on would get our collective heads out of the sand and create a strict regulatory environment to protect U.S. consumers, prevent underage gambling, and respect the decisions of States that don’t allow gambling. Experienced regulators already trusted by millions of Americans will maintain oversight and reputable operators with proven track records will provide a secure gaming environment for Americans. Finally, the revenue and jobs from this multibillion dollar industry will stay where it belongs – here in America.

“I still have serious concerns about legalizing the broad range of casino-type gambling through the Internet. The bill I am working on would make all other types of Internet gambling clearly illegal, while increasing penalties and strengthening the ability of law enforcement to shut down illegal sites.”

Following is summary of the online poker bill:

More…

This week the Entities are joined by Lance Bradley, Editor in Chief – Bluff Magazine and Canadian as they explore all things poker with a special emphasis on Canadians in Poker. Jess Wellman provides the poker headlines and Stu Hoegner phones in with an up date of the Harry Reid poker bill. All this and a giant inflatable beaver. For more information, show notes and an upcoming schedule, go to http://thisweekin.com.

Detailed episode highlights at WCP.
Released Dec 08, 2010

With clocks ticking and windows closing, the Ds are fighting over how far to the center they can be pulled, the Rs over how tough-guy they should be, and poker players have turned screaming pissy because Harry Reid’s online poker bill doesn’t say anything about 4 color decks nor include a provision to declare the Durrrr challenge a federal holiday.

That’s what they’ve been arguing about in Capitol Hill, Twitter, and 2+2, right?

One can only hope the most compelling arguments on behalf of federally regulated and legally mainstreamed online poker aren’t getting lost in the political muck. Fortunately, the simple matter at hand got spelled out super-clearly in Forbes magazine today by Michelle Minton, a political independent capable of speaking to a conservative audience:

Legalizing Online Gambling Is A No-Brainer
Here’s change both political parties can believe in

More…

No matter what side you’re on in the heated Harry Reid online poker non-debate … the emotional ups and downs attached to it (for some) were rather unprecedented yesterday … at least as far as poker politics go.

But actually we’ve seen it before, just last month in fact …

Exhilaration, anticipation, deflation, uncertainty, recalculating your outs with survival on the line … it was enough to get hearts beating worldwide. That’s just poker, right? But hey, now we know … regardless of who sees whom as the Grinder in Washington DC, with some luck and cards still to play, we should be good for a 5th place finish.

Looks as if Las Vegas Sun has as many versions of their articles as #reidbill has drafts.

I’d link to the old article they published earlier, but I can’t.  Instead, the old link points to a new-and-?-improved article “Reid’s office: Legalizing online poker still on lame-duck agenda.”

Has anyone heard of publishing corrections rather than updating old content on the web? But instead out with the old, and in with the new:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s staff said late Wednesday that he is still intent on pushing for legislation during the lame duck session to legalize online poker.

The remarks came in response to a Sun article posted online earlier in the day. In that earlier article, Reid was quoted telling the Sun after a press conference that he would not be adding legalization of online poker to his list of objectives during the lame duck session.

“We’re still working on that, we’re not able to,” Reid said in a remark captured on audio tape.

A spokesman for Reid said later that the second half of Reid’s comment was in response to a different reporter’s question. That question was not heard by other reporters and in apparently responding to it, Reid did not break eye contact with the Sun reporter.

I’m not sure what to call this, but is certainly *not* a retraction. For those of us here tracking #reidbill, I think the Sun might owe us all some damages for whiplash.

The Las Vegas Sun published an article with breath-stopping title and sensational image of Reid ponderously looking downwards while chatting into his cell phone.

Twitfeed #reidbill erupted.

But take a closer look at this article -> frankly it doesn’t make any sense.

1. “Rest easy, traditionalists: online poker will not be entering the legally authorized gaming arena this lame duck Congress, and that probably means it won’t be happening any time soon.” -> this sounds like the bill is dead.

2. Reid “would not be adding legalization of online poker to his list of objectives during the lame duck.” -> objectives? so is it dead?

3. “We’re still working on that, we’re not able to,” Reid said.-> Is he working, or he not able?

4.  “But if Reid says there’s still too much work to be done on it, that doesn’t seem too likely an outcome anymore.” -> if it’s not an objective then when why is he working on it? Is it unlikely, or dead?

5. Why is the *Las Vegas Sun* the one reporting on this?

The only thing that seems relevant in this article is why it was published in the first place.

There has been some confusion on at least one major topic contained within the currently-circulating Reid bill (via @Kevmath), and that is surrounding the licensing of ‘bad actors’ (see below on this), which is my shorthand for entities operating US-facing Internet poker sites.

Questions of Interest:

1. Can a ‘bad actor’ who operated knowing it was serving US customers be licensed under the Reid bill?

2. Do the ‘bad actors’ specified in the bill include owners of Internet gambling facilities and not just Internet poker facilities?

3. If they can be licensed, will ‘bad actors’ be able to participate in asset sales (not just share sales)?

4. Does it matter if a US-facing site is currently transacting business with US residents or only did so historically?

In trying to answer these questions, and to keep things relatively simple, I am going to analyze the example of a US casino, otherwise licensable, that wants to purchase a corporation that is today accepting US bets or wagers with full knowledge of that fact.

**************

More…

Here’s a Wednesday AM hotlist on the most recent #reidbill version 2.wtfknows

******
Read
@PartTimePoker -> The Reid Bill: Where Things Stand Now for Online Poker Players
@ftrainpoker ->  Harry Reid’s Internet Poker Bill: While We Wait
@politico -> Reid wants online poker in tax bill
@egrmagazine -> US e-gaming legislation reaches climax
@twoplustwoforum -> NoahSD 2+2 forum #reidbill Cliffnotes
@PokerGrump -> Scratching my head
@CalvinAyre -> Will ‘Harrah’ Reid’s online poker bill win the Congressional pot
@GamblingComp -> Backing Reid, Obama’s Labor Tsar Endorses Internet Gambling
@washtimes via @ESPNPoker -> D.C. slips online, fantasy gambling into bill

******
Listen
@CEMMagazine via @Kevmath -> #reidbill Dickenson Wright attny 12/9 10:30a EST

******
Watch
@TWi_Poker-> #reidbill in This Week in Poker w/ @GamingCounsel & @lance_bradley

******
Follow
#pokerblackout hashtag on Twitter
#reidbill hashtag on Twitter
http://twitter.com/scarlet_lv/teamreidbill

******
Act
@ppapoker Call the Capitol Switchboard. Say I support online poker! -> (202)224-3121

******

Check it out, front page of today’s Las Vegas Sun … got a speaking role in the Harry Reid online poker bill debate, playing a professional know-it-all an expert commentator on casinos, politics, and poker. When yammering on to a “mainstream” journalist for some 45 minutes about a plausibly complex subject, you never quite know which few lines will resonate … but here’s how my part played out in full:

Proposed language wouldn’t exclude these offshore companies upfront, as Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank’s previous attempt at Internet gambling legalization would have done. Instead, any gambling operator can apply for a license in the Reid bill. And yet, proposed language would allow only operators of existing casinos or racetracks to obtain licenses in the two years after regulators issue the first Internet poker license.

This provision, one of the most controversial in the Reid bill, is a reasonable compromise, although it has upset poker players who view it as unfairly benefiting Nevada casino giants over their favored gambling websites, said Dan Michalski, founder and editor of Pokerati.com, a Las Vegas-based poker blog.

Some lawmakers and their constituents view these foreign companies as lawbreakers. And U.S. casino companies probably wouldn’t support an equal playing field for Web casino operators, given that the U.S. companies have waited on the sidelines for more than a decade for the chance to make money online, Michalski said.

“This kind of puts (the online operators) in the penalty box for a while and says, ‘We might let you in but you’re certainly not going to be the first in line.’ I think that was to be expected.”