New Online Gambling Debate Taking Shape

by , Oct 21, 2010 | 5:16 pm

Check it out … with so many individual states hungry for cash, California being the hungriest, that state will definitely be taking a look at the issue until they somehow figure out a way to collect the most duckets from all those poker geeks calling California home.

The arguments themselves are nothing new — for or against — but you will notice a slight shift on the “Gogogo online gambling FTW!” side that we’re all supposed to be a part of …

Here, Patrick Dorinson, spokesperson for the Coalition of California Card Clubs and Tribes, is clearly pushing for the intrastate model, with the California Gambling Control Commission setting the rules. He addresses that critical component so matter-of-factly that any new recruits to the online poker side would hardly know this is different from the federally regulated, interstate model pushed Barney Frank, the PPA, and others … you know, what we’ve all been supporting for a long time. That one, according to statements in Washington DC congressional debate, looks to rely on regulatory standards set by the Nevada Gaming Control Board … with maybe some input from New Jersey and the Indians.

We always knew the battle for the right to claim poker supremacy between Cali and Nevada was fierce … but now it seems to be hitting a new level of import.

Our good friends at the PPA, you know, weren’t too happy about how California was looking to do online poker in that state. But might we see a necessary shift in strategy? If cash-desperate California pushes through online gambling within its borders, they will do so with an intrastate set-up — as seen in this debate — and from there it’s only a matter of time before other states cut-and-paste Cali’s new taxable online poker framework and follow suit … literally changing the online game for everyone.

3 Comments to “New Online Gambling Debate Taking Shape”

  1. piefarmer

    Thanks for the continued coverage of the legislation debate. I think a big chunk of poker may come to regret the push for legalization within a regulated framework. Unregulated poker under the cloud of illegality (status quo) is likely stronger than a statutorily legal game, regulated by the Feds and 50 states. Once you take something that is unregulated, and make it regulated, it becomes captive to the whomever controls the regulations. The PPA (I am a paid member) has pushed for regualtion as a way to achieve validation. We face many more Washingtons (bans) and Californias (single state systems) as a result of our push for HR 2267. U.S. Department of Texas Holdem, anyone?

  2. Easycure

    It may well turn back into a federal issue, but I do believe that this is what’s going to shape online poker’s future. The Feds (on both sides of the aisle) are to fractured, greedy and inept to get it done. It’s going to take the work of a state or two to get it on the radar before the Feds figure out what to do with it. Hopefully, both B&M and current online companies will have enough clout to help develop the framework so it’s not too weighted toward either side. Also, the more help the states get, the better chance the players won’t get a system that makes it impossible for at least some us to make money.


    Sign me up, let’s play online poker in the usa, we all do it now anyways, it’d be nice to know I’m safe.