California online poker study moves forward

[jetset]

STUDY ON INTERNET POKER BILL PROGRESSES

California legislative proposal moves forward to Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California legislators appeared to be taking a sensible and pragmatic view of online poker in the state this week as the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee (AGOC) unanimously forwarded a proposal to study the issue thoroughly to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

AB 2026 calls for the California Gambling Control Commission and the Department of Justice to initiate and carry out a study into factors surrounding the authorisation of online poker in California, reports Cardplayer magazine. The results of the study would be presented to the California Legislature by June 30, 2009 if it is approved.

The Cardplayer report revealed that Democrat Assemblyman Lloyd Levine is the bill’s author (see previous InfoPowa report).

The AGOC hearing took testimony from bill proponents Poker Voters of America President Jim Tabilio and Rod Blonien, who represented the card rooms of Commerce Club, Hollywood Park, the Lucky Derby, the Lucky Lady, Garden City and Lucky Chances.

“Many of the clubs that I mentioned are maxed out on Friday and Saturday nights. We have more players than we have seats available,” Blonien said. “Many of those people go home and play online.”

He had some strong opinions on Internet poker, characterising the industry as an unregulated and dangerous place for American consumers. “There’s no place that a law abiding Californian can go (online) and play a level game,” he claimed. “What Californians really need is a government regulated and fair website where they could go to play Internet poker.”

Concerns regarding conflict with anti-online gambling federal law were addressed by the state’s Legislative Counsel on Levine's request, which concluded that California would be allowed to operate an intrastate card room even with the rules of the UIGEA and the decades-old Wire Act in place.

One group opposed to the AB 2026 was the California Coalition Against Gambling Expansion, a group that wants to decrease the number of gambling options California residents have.

[Casinomeister]

Last year at the GIGSE, I. Nelson Rose predicted that California would legalize online poker in two years. Looks like he might not be far off track. From the Meister GIGSE report:

...One thing he touched on at the end, was that he predicted in two years, California will legalize online poker. It would be limited to licensed card clubs and Indian casinos located in California, and taxed at 25%. I emailed him later about this (there wasn't much time for Q&A afterwards) and he said that the poker clubs have wanted this for years. "Now it seems clear under federal law that Internet gambling is legal, so long as it is legal under state law and kept 100% in-state." The UIGEA does allow "intrastate" betting. The biggest problem will be working out the details on how this will come about.

http://www.casinomeister.com/newslet...pecial_ed.html

[jetset]

CALIFORNIA POKER BILL HAS A GOOD CHANCE TO PASS

Because it proposes only a study, legislators could get behind this bill, says law expert

The respected online gambling law expert Professor I. Nelson Rose from the Whittier Law School cautioned this week that the industry should not become too optimistic at the news that the Californian legislature is considering a bill to launch a study of intra-state legalisation of Internet poker (see previous InfoPowa report).

The professor said that whilst Representative Levine’s bill does have a good chance of being passed, it is currently only an initiative to study the implications of legalising online poker in the state.

“Levine thinks this bill might pass, because it only calls for a study," said the professor. "He is not that optimistic at the moment about legalisation, because it appears not only the federal, but the state, Departments of Justice are saying it would violate federal law, even if it is entirely intra-state.

"I think this is wrong both on the substantive law and on the purpose of federal law when it comes to gambling, which is only to help the states promote their public policies.”

The professor added that the biggest obstacle may be getting the political players to agree on how legalisation could work.

“There does not yet seem to be the motivation, mainly because the revenue projections have been small," he said, revealing that he had been working with numbers supplied by a major operator which showed that with advertising and the right to take credit cards, California-only online poker could be much bigger.

[Casinomeister]

He must have read my post