FLORIDA ALLOWING POKER GAME STAKES TO BE RAISED IN JULY!

[NY60]

[ QUOTE ]
But don't you think that the Tribe has been clearly flaunting FL law & the IGRA provisions WRT hours of operation (24/7) and stakes ($100 to $1k STTs) ?

If what you are saying is true, then it seems to me that FL should have contested this already ... and it seems to me that the Tribe is only marginally giving lip service to FL poker law to "keep the peace," most likely via some form of temporary backroom deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are absolutely right.

I have been saying this since the first day the limits went to $2 and they offered NL tourneys with $140+ buyins.

You have to remember that when it comes to the tribe, enforcement is always a very very hot political issue.

When I was a young pup, I worked as a clerk in the NYS Attorney Generals Office in Albany NY. The then Governor Mario Cuomo was having a dispute with the Seneca Indians near Niagara Falls over the cigarette tax. The Governor actually activated the NYS National Guard and had the reservation surrounded with road blocks for weeks. Nothing moved in or out except for essentials.

When it comes to a tribe (and don't hold me to this because no one has paid me to research this either), I don't think the State police can conduct a raid. That would probably amount to an invasion with the State facing steep financial penalties in Federal Court. I remember some time ago that the Seminole tribal leader was wanted by police for a crime and he hide on the reservation for almost a year before they caught him off the reservation.

I guess what I am trying to say is that when we are dealing with the interpretation of this poker statute we have to seperate the tribe from the pari-mutuels.

I don't think the pari-mutuels are going to push too hard especially since no one can justify the drastic differences between allowing a LIMIT cash player to lose a maximum $80 on one poker hand while at the same time allowing a NL cash player to lose $8000 on a single hand. There simply is no ambiguity in the effect of a broader reading of the statute.