Yes definitely, because California permits commercial poker rooms, they would not have to opt in to a federal bill, they would likely have to vote to opt out of Federal program, and it's a lot easier to justify doing nothing than it is taking action to turn down a program that basically guarantees millions of dollars to your bankrupt State.

The tribes are so ******ed that they don't even realize the presence of online poker boosts foot traffic into casinos. The studies prove this several times over. Online poker players and casino players don't have a huge correlation between traffic in a casino. I think we need to finally do away giving native american's favor's because we kicked them off their land 100's of years ago... get over it.

This thinking reminds me of why professional sports would not want games on TV because they would hurt attendances. What they did not realize was that for every person who decided against attending the game to watch on TV, there were several more who would end up being introduced to the sport and then follow that up with visits to the park. It's the same thing with poker - you may lose some brick and mortar players to online poker, but you will gain more than that who are introduced to the game online who want to try it at a casino or card room.

In my opinion, once everybody involved with it happening have passed on, then it is time for everybody to move on. It is absolutely horrible what happened, but it's over and really old news. As far as I know, we don't pay reparations to Japan or other countries we have defeated in war.

degaulle tried, but eisenhower just laughed at him on his way home.

No, the tribes know this just fine. The problem is that the start-up costs for an online CA site are so high in this bill that some tribes won't be able to participate, and therefore won't directly benefit from the opportunity to market B&M operations directly to online players.

But more importantly, they all know that online poker legislation will be the gateway to full-blown online casino gaming. This is where the excluded tribes will really lose out, as the competition captures the captive audience of new players, the switch-over players who prefer online to b&m and the foot-traffic players who come to the b&m casinos as a result of marketing to online player.

While a boom in online poker translates to a boom in live poker, a boom in online casino gaming quite likely leads to a bust in live casino gaming. Those that are included in online casino gaming will quite likely see an overall increase in their bottom line figures; those that are excluded will quite likely go broke.

By the way, we didn't just kick the Native Americans off their land. We essentially performed systematic genocide of their race and forced the surviving remnants of their nations into generations of abject poverty. We might owe them more than just one or two generations of special favors.

Can we get the latest cliff notes on what's going on with online poker happening in California?

That's easy: It's dead for another year. Since the state legislative session is over, the whole process must restart in January.

Going off of PokerXanadu's cliffs in a new Reid/Kyl thread

How would this affect California and their ability/willingness to opt-out and successfully (in their special interests's minds) operate intra-state iPoker?

I.e., it sounds like players would have to physically go to a cardroom or race track to deposit with cash to play online. (Could be seen as good or bad by those interests)

Etc.

It would be impossible for CA to do it on the Internet under this federal bill as any unlicensed site that uses the Internet would violate this provision even if the players and sites are all intrastate. The only way to do it would be for players to deposit in cash at the casinos and the sites implement a dedicated wired or wireless intranet system where all transmissions are strictly intrastate.

So how would California go about f--king up this sure thing then?

I mean, it seems there's plenty of Tribe/B&M language/appeasement placed in the Reid/Kyl bill - if passed, are there some powerful Cali special interests that still see it in their own $$ interest to CBlock California opting into a Federal scheme?

Are there powerful enough Cali interests to lobby on a federal level to get language put-in/changed in the R/K bill so that their own Cali intra-state opporuntities remain?

Cali player numbers/$$ + Nevada regulatory oversight seems like a pretty big win-win for players in opt-in States in a federal iPoker system.

the fact that nothing has gotten done in a year and a half speaks volumes about the incompetency of the californian legislature and economy in general.

i'm so sick of this garbage. we should have been playing on commerce or bay101 online a year ago. it would have been a total win/win for the players as well as the state. but noooooo; we can't get it done because we're a bunch of lazy, childish, half wits who would rather argue about petty individual self interests than complete the simple task of setting up an online poker system which would be a boon to cali businesses, natives, recreational players, and poker pros alike.

By the way, I'm pretty sure that cable TV systems could be utilized to implement intrastate remote wagering without violating the provisions of the Reid/Kyl bill. It would then just be a matter of figuring out a deposit/withdrawal system that doesn't utilize "financial institutions" but is convenient. Maybe cash at lottery outlets would work.

Which is why it would be awesome if a federal bill were written/passed in a way that Cali special interests realized their best (individual) bets would be to opt in.

One can dream at least.

Sen. Wright to Reintroduce California Online Poker Bill in 2013

PX do you think this can get the green light in January? I'm assuming Senator Wright worked out most the kinks to appease the opposition (hopefully nothing too restrictive or taxing to the players). If he didn't wouldn't COPA just re organize and block again?

It sounds more like Wright thinks it would have passed last time if not for opposition by COPA, and therefore he wants to take a shot at passing the exact same bill without any changes now that COPA took a dive. I suspect there is much more behind the scenes that caused the demise of COPA than just a decision that it wasn't needed anymore because the bill didn't get traction in the CA Congress.

No doubt everyone involved knew that a bill was likely to be introduced again in 2013, so COPA wouldn't just disband unless there was something else that went wrong. Sounds like Wright is depending on whatever that was to keep an organized opposition from the same tribes from resurfacing, giving his bill a good shot at passage this time, imo.

It also helps that other states are moving forward on authorizing and licensing online sites.

Note: I have no connection to CA politics, so this is just pure speculation on my part.

California Poker Bill to be Reintroduced as Soon as Next Week [pokerfuse.com]

California online poker bill SB 1463 will be reintroduced into the state Senate “probably next week,” pokerfuse has learned.

A staff member for State Senator Roderick Wright told pokerfuse that there are some typos and technical issues that need to be addressed, but if those changes are complete by next week, “there is no reason not to introduce it.”

h/t: @taxdood

I guess they're looking to seal the deal before a federal bill passes. Let's wrap it up and slap a bow on it for Christmas.

Cali games would be unreal. If Fed bill does not happen this is a damn good consolation prize.

What would be the timeframe from introduced to voted on and from passed to operational?

I have no idea how Cali government works but could they really introduce it and pass it all within 7 days?

Right, I might have been a little overzealous there but I'm going to put it on my wishlist to Santa anyway. Introduced and passed before I carve the Christmas turkey.

That will be a fat ass turkey if your right. Using my official "one time dealer" now

Agreed. One time dealer!

Nothing will be introduced until the California legislative session begins in January. After that, expect hearings in late January or February. The legislative session ends in June, so there should be an indication before then.

The California legislature has been more dysfunctional than Congress over the past several years. While Democrats now have a super-majority in the California legislature, there were arguments among Democrats the last time an online poker bill was in front of the California legislature. There's nothing to indicate that the warring parties (for this bill) have changed, so it's very unclear if passage is possible.

-- Russ Fox