Where Do We Start????

[WLC4Ever]

First of all, thanks to everyone posting links to analysis of this new law as well as state law and everything else. I've had my eyes opened in a number of ways.

The first, is that poker WILL be legalizied in this country, probably in the next 6 years (3 election cycles). Second, there are a ton of ways we can go about accomplishing our goal. The question then is where to begin?

I think the main question we have to ask is where to start, on the Federal or State level? I can see arguments for both. State legislation seems easier to affect as there is a smaller voting base and less money involved. For people in states like Illinois, the state laws seem to be the stronger deterrent then what the Feds have done. On the other had, there are supremecy clause issues, and even if you can completely legalize poker in your state, it won't matter if you can't do it without breaking a federal law, and any federal law renders a conflicting state law moot. Then again, action on the state level could go a long way towards bringing pressure on the Feds.

Thoughts? I'm thinking of starting a blog to capture all the good articles I'm finding here and elsewhere, and to explore this quetion more, but if there are any obvious flaws in my logic please shoot it down now and save me the trouble.

[permafrost]

States, only choice.

The new Federal law helps enforce State anti-gambling laws that have probably existed since statehood. If you somehow get rid of the new law, you still have the State laws.

The only hope is legalization and regulation of online poker on an intrastate basis, and that is allowed under the new law. Will every State do that?, probably not, but some will. If the horse racing crowd can do it, we can too.

[Gringo777]

Good idea on the blog and posting articles. I have been pretty active at replying to online statements and emails that I receive from right wing sites that supported the bill passage. I want them to know that many republicans are outraged. I read a good editorial by George Will today and will attach the link.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15265338/site/newsweek/page/2/

As a very disgruntled Republican voter, i think that a rationale approach to appealing to their congressmen vs the "you #%(# moron!) will do more to influence the general public as well as perhaps, someday, your congressman.

[Harkey]

I'm not an attorney, but I believe poker can be set up on an interstate network the same way that legal horse-race wagering (YouBet, TVG, Xpressbet, etc.) is set up, e.g. if the network is limited to residents of states which permit licensed/regulated poker. Of course the states are going to want their share of the revenues, so whatever company sets this up (e.g. Harrahs, MGM-Mirage, etc.) would have to set up satellite shops/servers in each state and provide acountability for who contributed what to the rake. The federal laws could (and would) be ammended, if necessary, to allow it. I'd imagine that many states would be willing to be part of such networks, since it would generate revenue.

[WLC4Ever]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not an attorney, but I believe poker can be set up on an interstate network the same way that legal horse-race wagering (YouBet, TVG, Xpressbet, etc.) is set up, e.g. if the network is limited to residents of states which permit licensed/regulated poker. Of course the states are going to want their share of the revenues, so whatever company sets this up (e.g. Harrahs, MGM-Mirage, etc.) would have to set up satellite shops/servers in each state and provide acountability for who contributed what to the rake. The federal laws could (and would) be ammended, if necessary, to allow it. I'd imagine that many states would be willing to be part of such networks, since it would generate revenue.

[/ QUOTE ]

And what a powerful lobby: Voters, Big Business, and Increased Tax Revenue...like the holy trinity law-making

[aces_full]

I'm not a lawyer but I am a pessimist. I really don't see legal online poker in the U.S. It has to do with the fact that (in theory) at least, issues of morality are supposed to be left to individual states. Gaming is regulated on the state level. The federal governement can't make playing poker legal or illegal. That decision is left to individual states, so if you live in a state where poker is currently NOT legal (even in B&M form) don't hold your breath for legal online poker, it aint gonna happen.

There is another problem I see that hasn't been discussed much here, and that is Indian gaming. Here in Connecticut the state has a compact with the tribes that gives them exclusive rights to all non-lottery gaming. It's not likely that our lawmakers would allow a legal out of state company to accept wagers from CT residents, and I doubt Foxwoods would be in a hurry to offer a product to CT residents that would potentially keep customers from coming into the B&M.

Maybe someone with more knowledge could explain this to me, but if online poker (and gambling in general) is such a great idea, why hasn't the U.S. gaming industry made legal onlime gaming a reality by now? My feeling is that the industry doesn't want it-they realize that they will make more money in the long run by getting you to come to the casino.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe someone with more knowledge could explain this to me, but if online poker (and gambling in general) is such a great idea, why hasn't the U.S. gaming industry made legal onlime gaming a reality by now? My feeling is that the industry doesn't want it-they realize that they will make more money in the long run by getting you to come to the casino.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know if I have more knowledge, however, given the legal landscape and the pursuit of offshore gaming providers by the DOJ I can understand why corporations like Harrah's don't want to be involved (or at least proceed without some sort of approval). As far as the Indians are concerned, I'm guessing that it's basically the same thing, they have a good thing going why mess it up? Wouldn't want to proceed without some sort of approval.

For the offline gaming sites they're basically legal in their localities.

[WLC4Ever]

[ QUOTE ]
My feeling is that the industry doesn't want it-they realize that they will make more money in the long run by getting you to come to the casino.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this at all. From what I've read, it was the gaming company's that backed off this bill at the last minute. I think they want to move in eventually. At any rate, the state I'm in, IL, has pretty strict internet laws, but also has riverboat gambling and is alwasy looking to expand. The casino companies are here, the Gov has a taste for the tax dollars, seems like only a matter of time...

[Python49]

this is an unrelated question but I wanted to ask it without starting a new thread. Does anyone know if/when the banks start not allowing EFT transactiosn with gambling sites does this mean we wont be able to cash out our money? Like they just wont accept a transaction from the site to your account?

[SFBAY23]

This post was made last week in legislation forum and got pushed down with all the Stars news... Link (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=7616428&an=0&page=5#Post 7616428)

Looks like this group is working on what the OP talks of.

[blueodum]

My feeling is that the industry doesn't want it-they realize that they will make more money in the long run by getting you to come to the casino.

I don't see the basis for thinking this way. It would be like McDonalds thinking "Let's not open up any franchises in Mexico; we can make more money from Mexicans if we get them to come to US franchises."

[RGL]

If B&M US Casinos got into the internet, they'd probably use their player's card model. You'd accumulated points redeemable for B&M casino cash, trips, rooms, etc. That way, the internet business would support the B&M business. It's what Harrah's does in their 30+ casinos, funneling redemptions into their LV properties. That way, they let you earn comps that will generate even more revenue for the operation.

[WLC4Ever]

So I wonder if a letter to the casino companies in our respective states is the way to start, see where we stand and if they are even considering it. Probably get nothing but a form letter but you never know. I'd be willing to track everyone's repsonses if anyone wants to volunteer