@Haley_Hintze

I'm not a Californian, but the latest version of that state's online-poker bill has potential consumers sucking eggs. It's bad news.

Tribal lobbyists succeeded in having sovereignty-voiding language removed, which is a huge blow to consumer protection.

and that's a farce for process going INSIDE consumers' homes. Unsuccessful complaints would have few recourse's.









‏

The bill still has lots of consumer protections, including in regards to the tribes. The amended bill changed the wording of the tribal sovereignty provision from voiding "tribal sovereignty" to voiding "tribal sovereign immunity" in regards to licensing and regulation for i-poker. Shouldn't be any difference as regards protections for consumers.

bill was updated again and/or something happened

9:30 a.m. - Room 3191
(Please note room change)
(TELEVISED)

S.B. No. 1463 Wright. Internet gambling. (Urgency)

Anyone know if there will be a live stream?

would like to watch this hearing if anyone has a link

http://senate.ca.gov/todaysevents

Looks like this is going to be listen only.

Looks like it is pulled for today, well to another brighter day.

they just said the author pulled the bill...huh?

WTF ... same thing happened in Illinois two weeks ago.

Upcomming dates:

June 15 Budget must be passed by midnight (Art. IV, Sec. 12 (c)(3)).
June 28 Last day for a legislative measure to qualify for the Nov. 6 general election ballot (Elec. Code Sec. 9040).
July 6 Last day for policy committees to meet and report bills (J.R. 61(b)(13)). Summer Recessbegins at the end of this day’s session if Budget Bill has been passed (J.R. 51(b)(2)).

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalert...committee.html

This article makes it sound like they are arguing about how, not if...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/cali...oker-bill.html

Damn it, it can't even get enough votes to get out of committee? What % is needed to pass?

Time to hit the SB1463 action thread.

There doesn't seem to be much support in the California SB 1463 Action Plan thread. Paint drying comes to mind.

Not the greatest of bills, and kind of feel that we are just shouting in a room that is empty. The only way this moves is if the tribes are all on board and other interests don't oppose.

Looks like we are back to hoping for a Federal solution. It will be the mother of all lame ducks as the fiscal cliff will be approaching but the election can really shift the dynamic at the federal level.

Still would be a lot better than current policy and merge, it's never going to be as great as it was with State and Tribal hands taking their cut.

"Wright, who chairs the committee, announced to a crowded room at the start of the hearing that he decided to pull the bill from the agenda, sparking an exodus to the hallway."
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalert...committee.html

Glad to hear people showed up for the hearing and the Senator's could see some support for internet poker in Cali.

RIP SB1463.

So even with " horse racing, Las Vegas and international gambling interests " benefitting from this bill it will not move forward without the majority of tribes giving it their blessing? I thought they ironed out the kinks in that regard. Well, I've heard patience is a virtue. Even if it had passed today what would have been the realistic timeline for sites to be up an running? I know there was an urgency clause attached and I read somewhere that the proposed timeline was conservative.

The problem is that this bill gave too much to those other entities. COPA said no dice, and w/o their blessing, the bill is history.

ONLINE POKER: Author pulls bill at first hearing

Looks like California is joining New Jersey as a state where passage was defenitely possible, but warring factions can't get their **** together.

Nevada is pulling farther and farther ahead. Before the end of the year Nevada residents are going to have access to the most secure, high quality online poker rooms anywhere. Once those virtual cards hit the felt the entire landscape is going to change. Then states will be presented with the option of simply allowing their residents to pool together with Nevada's in exchange for a % of the revenue those residents bring in. As this player pool grows it is going to make the NV poker rooms all the more appealing. And as states see others making easy $$$ just by giving their residents access, they will do the same and just not bother trying to compete for the market.

Thinks are looking good if we take a longer term view of things.

This will happen in very few, if any states. And CA will not be one of them.

in regards to this bill is it a dead duck?

I hope you're right but I can't see it.

Sometimes my eyes hurt when I think of how differently I see the world on this issue than many on this forum. It's like I'm Vulcan with green blood.

California's online poker problem