CA Online Poker Initiative!!

[Tuff_Fish]

OK folks, we are under way.

My initiative to get legal online poker in California has been sent to the California Secretary of State for title and summary.

link to CA sec of state

Go to the bottom of the page.

Be sure and read every line. There will be rakeback. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

It takes about 4-5 weeks to get the initiative cleared for circulation. In the meantime I will create an information web site and fix it so anyone can download the petition and sign it.

Everyone in CA needs to pitch in and help if you really want a legal, trouble free, US playing site. In California, if this passes, it is law and it happens.

I will be trying to line up help from the veterans and teachers. My job will be to convince them there is real money here.

Since California moved their primary up to Feb 5, 2008, we are already in a time crunch. We can't gather signitures until it is released for circulation by the Attorney General, and all signatures must be submitted 133 days prior to the election. So, we will have about 120 or so days to gather em up.

I would really like to get on the Feb 5 primary. There will likely be fewer than normal ballot initiatives and that should help the cause. ( I think )

The hard part will be getting enough signatures. If we get on the ballot, I believe we have a good shot at passage.

So, good luck to us.

Tuff, the politician?? [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
.

[Emperor]

Very well written. In my opinion.

Too bad Tuff Fish interjected his anti-multitabling HUD cheater insanity to this.

I vote for BAN of OP.

[Tuff_Fish]

Two things.

1. I wrote what I felt was doable.

2. Multitabling HUD bots/grinders would kill the game in 2-3 years tops. I envision the teachers and veterans getting excited about the prospect of decades of income.

3. This was written for the California recreational player, not pro grinders.

Tuff

[mungpo]

[ QUOTE ]
Multitabling HUD bots/grinders would kill the game in 2-3 years tops.

[/ QUOTE ]
What evidence do you have that in the future grinders will kill the game of poker?

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
Two things.

1. I wrote what I felt was doable.

I think its huge mistake that you are not going to seek cooperation from existing card club licensees. Now not only will you have the Indian Casino lobby against you on this initiative, you will also have exisiting card club licensees against you.

2. Multitabling HUD bots/grinders would kill the game in 2-3 years tops. I envision the teachers and veterans getting excited about the prospect of decades of income.

3. This was written for the California recreational player, not pro grinders.

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not a lawyer. But I believe you have also set up your initiative, if it passes for a huge court challange. Current state law is that pots CAN NOT BE RAKED, and the house revenue can not be based on pot size. Your inititive is in direct violation of this statute.

Another potential violation is that no new licenses for poker are to be granted until 2015 or 2020. By not using the existing card club licenses and adding a provision for them to be allowed online poker, you are adding a new state operated license which may be in violation of no new card club licenses. I could see a challange by both the existing card clubs and Indian casinos on this point.

Good luck

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Two things.

1. I wrote what I felt was doable.

I think its huge mistake that you are not going to seek cooperation from existing card club licensees. Now not only will you have the Indian Casino lobby against you on this initiative, you will also have exisiting card club licensees against you.

2. Multitabling HUD bots/grinders would kill the game in 2-3 years tops. I envision the teachers and veterans getting excited about the prospect of decades of income.

3. This was written for the California recreational player, not pro grinders.

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not a lawyer. But I believe you have also set up your initiative, if it passes for a huge court challange. Current state law is that pots CAN NOT BE RAKED, and the house revenue can not be based on pot size. Your inititive is in direct violation of this statute.

Another potential violation is that no new licenses for poker are to be granted until 2015 or 2020. By not using the existing card club licenses and adding a provision for them to be allowed online poker, you are adding a new state operated license which may be in violation of no new card club licenses. I could see a challange by both the existing card clubs and Indian casinos on this point.

Good luck

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually did contact the Golden State Gaming Assoc. I had originally put in the cardrooms as the sole source of applications and funding for the very reason you noted. I was also going to write in a provision that allowed then to have terminals for online play without impacting their existing licenses. They chose to take a pass on it. I am not sure the folks I contacted thoroughly understood what I was doing.

( I also originally had the cardrooms charging a surcharge for depositing. Imagine the bawling that would have generated)

The initiative changes state law with regard to the other two points you noted. If it passes, those laws do not apply to the California owned poker site. They do, however, apply in all other cases.

There will definitely be folks opposed to this for reasons that have nothing to do with multitabling.

Tuff
.

[Anders]

Good work. Anti HUD seems fine to me, but why is it again that I'm only allowed to play 1 table instead of 6 and generate less rake for the great state of California? Bah.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
Good work. Anti HUD seems fine to me, but why is it again that I'm only allowed to play 1 table instead of 6 and generate less rake for the great state of California? Bah.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the rake you pay comes out of the accounts of 6 fish who go broke in record time, decide that online is no good and never return.

One more time. If you are taking money off the site on a regular basis, YOU are not generating anything except negative cash flow for the site. You are simply paying a commission to fish in the pond.

The state is better off having the rec players trade money amongst themselves than have you taking a regular cut off the tables.

In any case there ain't no multitabling.

If you grinders are so dead set on multitabling, FTP allows 12 tables if you talk nice to them.

Tuff
.

[Emperor]

How many hundreds of prop players getting paid 165% rakeback will you need to keep games going since the multi-tablers wont be?

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
How many hundreds of prop players getting paid 165% rakeback will you need to keep games going since the multi-tablers wont be?

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a break.

[img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

.