«

Legal Gambling Legal Shmambling

by , Feb 10, 2007 | 10:31 pm

Comments (8)

Curious article in the DMN about an apparent slowdown in efforts to legalize gambling in Texas. The lobbying dollars are drying up, the Indians need gas for their school bus, and I dunno, seems like there might be some slow-play going on from at least a few heavily vested interests. But still, no mention of poker — no charity poker, no small legal poker rooms, no online poker … seven, eight, nine, ten, nothin! Not sure if this is a good or a bad thing.

I gotta think the specific interests of poker need to be part of the conversation at some point … (because really, wouldn’t it suck to get “legal” poker only to have some game-ruining betting structures in place?) But at the same time, it might not be a bad idea to let the casino and anti-casino forces fight it out, only to let poker offer itself up as some sort of political/economic compromise.


8 Comments to “Legal Gambling Legal Shmambling”


  1. Legal Poker in the US » Blog Archive » Legal Gambling Legal Shmambling     says:
    February 11th, 2007 at 3:59am

    […] Original post by DanM and software by Elliott Back […]


  2. DanM     says:
    February 11th, 2007 at 3:48pm

    Yes, Elliott Back, you make an excellent software that steals content without permission. Well done. One of these days, just an fyi, you will die.


  3. Poker_Addict     says:
    February 12th, 2007 at 12:57am

    Never gonna happen, Perry and and his kunts dont have the balls to try it.


  4. DanM     says:
    February 12th, 2007 at 3:25am

    Mr. Addict,

    Though I respect the always reliable challenge of calling any male a “pussy,” I gotta think with the wheels that are already in motion, Perry and his kronies might respectfully disagree.


  5. lavigne     says:
    February 12th, 2007 at 1:54pm

    you are right dan, poker is not part of the gambling conversation. Poker is a game of skill.

    the fact is, the casino forces have not given up. In order for casino gaming to happen we will need a state constitutional amendment. In order to get a constitutional amendment passed, you need a super majority in both chambers of the state legislature and then statewide election…

    We are keeping poker seperate because we believe it to be a game of skill and therefore not gambling under the strict definition in the constitution. This means we don’t need an amendment or a super majority. It is just a regular bill that way…


  6. DanM     says:
    February 12th, 2007 at 1:57pm

    But can you convince anybody other than the 10 percent of the population or so that plays poker that this is the case?


  7. lavigne     says:
    February 12th, 2007 at 2:07pm

    that’s the challenge my man. we have to convince 76 state reps and 16 senators…


  8. J.E.H.     says:
    February 13th, 2007 at 10:48am

    Money talks, bullsh!t walks. Unfortunately, I suspect it will take a friendly municipal court ruling in some Texas town a la what happened in Gardena, CA to make legal poker rooms finally happen in Texas.

    Unless somehow we could get Flo Shapiro to make a pro-poker maneuver that ties in with some child protection thing, and then we could all carp about how it’s All About The Children! Won’t Somebody Please Think About The Children! How about taxes on the rake to fund additional Amber Alert ephemera? Hmm. And mandatory HPV shots for all poker players. That should get Perry on board with it too.