The 2+2 Forum Archives: Throw the "Hail Mary" - Poker Carve-Out in the Lame Duck Session (PPA)

Most posters in these forums who have followed the "progress" of the anti-gambling legislation that just passed congress, now know how that happened from a procedural point of view in congress. It got tacked on a conference committee report of a must pass bill (ports security), and where both the committee didn't actually meet but whose report was fashioned by select handful of members of each party chosen by the leadership in each party, and particularly the majority party, and then same was passed without possibility of debate or ammendment. We knew what their strategy was, and that we had to run the rapids of a series of such bills, not just in the run up to the recess prior to elections, but during the subsequent lame duck session as well, where an omnibus spending bill frequently acts as a "christmas tree" in attracting a host of non-germane matters.

Well we got what we feared and by the procedural means we feared, and earlier rather than later. And now many of us are feeling desparate, even though that is not necessarily called for as it is far from clear yet whether restrictions on funding poker sites can be enforced to an adequate degree to inhibit the casual player from playing.

But being desparate doesn't mean we shouldn't have any hope for legal change, even if that chance is extremely slim. So let's not view the game as over, but as 4th and long and down 2 points. So we and all the groups we support such as the PPA need to throw the "Hail Mary".

We've got enough lawyers and insiders here to fashion the language. What we need is the lobbying and influential muscle to get our non-germane carve-out tacked on in the lame duck in another must pass bill (and taking the long view we can try this tactic repeatedly just as our opponents did).

And one thing should be clear - despite the fact that many of our allies in the past fight are representatives of sports betting and online casino concerns and groups, we can only care about ourselves now - it's every gambling group for itself. So we only focus on our own carve-out, and make no effort nor accept any inducements to ally with sports betting concerns or online casino interests in the future. Only poker!

It is clear that this is what we need to do. However there is a catch. And that relates to the reason many posters here didn't see why the language covered poker. The new law basically just enforces existing state laws against forms of gambling that they haven't specifically authorized. And the new law rightfully (since the federal government's powers under the commerce clause don't allow it to regulate gambling inside an individual state for its citizens alone), allows states to legalize online poker within its confines for its citizens only (NY can legalize online poker within its borders but must take steps to block access to non-residents). So no carve-out for us can postively legalize online poker in a manner that forces an individual state to allow same. What it can do, is allow states to not only legalize online poker within its borders, but in a manner similar to multi-state lottery compacts, allow its citizens to be pooled into either a larger national multi-state player pool, or the current international pool we are used to.

All our efforts should be put in getting such a carve-out attached to some must pass bill in the future, either in the next lame duck session, or in future sessions of congress. So you lawyers here write that carve out which should to my mind do the following:

1) Ammend the provisions of the ports security bill regarding illegal online gambling to allow states to legalize their citizens playing in multi-state and international sites according to their own regulations (and taxation) for same.

2) Allow outside entities who are licensed by a state to conduct online poker for its citizens (like any of the current sites) to be registered as a legitimate business in the US providing that they only allow players from licensed states, and comply with all other legislation regarding online gambling (they can't have sports betting or casino subsidiaries that accept US players).

3) Make it clear that any provisions of the wire act cannot be construed so as to prevent the above.

So anyway that's my proposed focus for us, the PPA and any poker lobbying organizations. We're just for us, and have to cast aside our former alliances with online sports betting and casino interests, because they will sink our own smaller ship. We just care about poker. Period.

N.B. I am a serious religious Catholic and would not otherwise use the name of the Mother of Our Lord in a profane manner, and have only done so here because of the common football term which is appropriate for describing a possible tactic that can save our efforts.

Maria, Mater gratiae, Mater misericordiae, tu me ab hoste protege et mortis hora suscipe.

Edited by Performify (10/02/06 08:04 PM)

The 2+2 Forums