Illinois proposes to allow online poker to be run by race tracks

mshalen · #1 05-30-2007, 07:46 AM

Here is the link. Very strange happenings in the state legislature. They also want to allow bookies to take bets over the internet as well as construct more land based casinos.

http://www.dailyherald.com/search/se....asp?id=317377

TheEngineer · #2 05-30-2007, 07:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Here is the link. Very strange happenings in the state legislature. They also want to allow bookies to take bets over the internet as well as construct more land based casinos.

http://www.dailyherald.com/search/se....asp?id=317377

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds awesome! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

MiltonFriedman · #3 05-30-2007, 09:33 AM

Tip of the iceberg .... There is a HUGE hole in the UIGE Act, expressly authorizing IntraState online gambling ...except on sports.

Contrary to the Frist Crew .... gambling is a cultural phenomenon for the US, it is an accepted way for a State to raise money, AND there is a huge unmet market demand for "legal" online poker in the US.

This Illinois bill will NOT pass, it is an 11th hour "crisis" posture, but it will gain momentum.

permafrost · #4 05-30-2007, 12:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There is a HUGE hole in the UIGE Act, expressly authorizing IntraState online gambling ...except on sports.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your "expressly authorizing" is not quite correct. The states "expressly" authorize gambling, not UIGEA.

UIGEA does not apply to legal intrastate wagers (poker, sports, ponies, etc.). It is saying that states legalize gambling and the Feds are not involved.

MiltonFriedman · #5 05-30-2007, 02:18 PM

"Expressly authorizing" may have been an overstatement, but not by much .... The UIGE Act "expressly exempts" IntraState online gambling, provided two rather easy conditions are met.

Whether the IntraState exemption does extend to sports betting depends upon something called the Professional Sports and Amateur Sports Protection Act, about which I do not give a damn.

TheEngineer · #6 05-30-2007, 07:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is a HUGE hole in the UIGE Act, expressly authorizing IntraState online gambling ...except on sports.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your "expressly authorizing" is not quite correct. The states "expressly" authorize gambling, not UIGEA.

UIGEA does not apply to legal intrastate wagers (poker, sports, ponies, etc.). It is saying that states legalize gambling and the Feds are not involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's what he meant, but you're absolutely correct. Even HR 4777 expressly allowed states to choose to offer Internet gambling, except for sports, so long as states verified that all wagering was conducted intrastate and that all bettors were of age.

Nate tha\\\' Great · #7 05-30-2007, 02:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This Illinois bill will NOT pass, it is an 11th hour "crisis" posture, but it will gain momentum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Milton,

The governor here is generally not in favor of expanding gambling, so the fact that he's changed his mind (however temporarily) opens the door a little bit. If he can get the House speaker on his side then this has a real chance.

Another scenario is that there is a compromise version of the budget that leaves the provisions about internet gambling intact. The internet poker provisions seem to have flown mostly under the radar, which is probably a good thing in this instance, and also with the internet stuff you avoid NIMBY politics (or their opposite, since some pro-gambling downstate legislators can't be happy that all the new casino licenses are proposed for the Chicago area).

I would say there's like a 20% chance that some fairly sweeping gambling measure passes and perhaps another 15% above and beyond that that you have a toned-down version which passes that includes internet poker. These are utter guesses though as I'm not a state politics wonk.

mshalen · #8 05-30-2007, 02:38 PM

It was the internet betting and track reference which caught my eye. Previous reports talked about the tracks being upset at additional casinos being allowed to open and the tracks wanted to share in the added revenue the state would get. It appears that they may be throwing the tracks a bone but not understanding the ramifications of what they are proposing. I have been following this for a while (as I live in close proximity to 3 of the proposed casinos) but this was the first time I saw any reference to online wagering. There was no internet mention in today's Tribune coverage but I will keep my eyes open for any additional info.

MyTurn2Raise · #9 05-30-2007, 02:57 PM

6% rake....awesome

please keep the gov'ts out of internet gambling

MiltonFriedman · #10 05-30-2007, 05:39 PM

Nate,

I have seen Illinois politics for years. This is not unlike the "Funding Disaster looms for Chicago Schools" scenario. That internet gambling was floated is encouraging. If the racing lobby is behind it, then there is a slight chance .... but not likely this year.

(Gov. Blaze is not too adept at getting crises resolved from what I saw in the quoted reactions, but the inclusion in his proposal is good news.)

Your NIMBY point is a good one, since the purveyors would be established already. .... I do not know if Cahokia Downs still operates, but it would be great if it eventually operates an online site a couple of miles from the Eastern District of Missouri, but doesn't allow St Louis IP players ....