Interesting. So what I thought was a firmly established matter of law (the wager exists simultaneously at both the location of the server and the location of the bettor, or something to that effect) can be overridden by a state law. I guess there is always the possibility of someone filing a suit challenging that aspect of the law.

Total agreement with the rest of your conclusions.

Even if it goes to a referendum I imagine it'd still pass. There was a question about it on the last local ballots and it passed.

I think the question was about authorizing sports betting, but I think it is an easy pass in any event.

I really think the DoJ's previous stance on iPoker and iGaming in general is what made Christie veto the bill in the first place. After the DoJ's announcement, it's believable that Christie will sign it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...01-02-11-17-18

Looks like good news to me! If this passes then living in Newark, NJ will get a whole lot better lol.

could it get any worse?

you make a good point, this is stronger for us

Woohooo gogogo Nj. One time!

If we want federal, we need a state any state to get it up and running. Once they see the revenue generated federal will so to follow. It looks very good this year for either Nevada or NJ to get the ball rolling.

You're right. Though the part where it passed seems ideal for this measure.

Another article about the potential legislation:

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/p...871e3ce6c.html

I'm not sure why any player would be excited about this bill. The poker (and all other i-gambling) will be limited to only NJ residents. There are no accommodations for combined player pools.

The bill specifically states that a person applying to open an account must provide proof of residency in NJ. Licensees must also verify the location of every player as located in NJ at the time of every wager. Cashouts can only be sent to a NJ address, and the player must be verified as located in NJ at the time of cashout.

There is also very little in the bill in the way of consumer protections for players. Perhaps there will be more in the regulations developed after passage of the bill, but the law itself will have little. For instance, there is nothing at all about segregating or protecting player funds. There is nothing about an arbitration process for players to appeal account closures. There is nothing about protections from collusion.

The limited govt revenue (10% of gross site revenues) and the open market to all NJ casinos are pluses, that will likely result in enough competition to keep rake reasonable. But liquidity for i-poker will be limited, and unlike NV, without the opportunity for interstate or international player pools without passage of additional state legislation.

It's a step in the direction of licensed and regulated i-poker in the US, but still far from player-friendly i-poker.

Way to rain on our parade, Xanadu! Seriously though, I dont feel I have the power to influence this bill or the politics involved in time for this vote to see the necessary (or at least, desired) changes implemented before the bill passes. As a NJ resident, if I have to choose between this half-***ed bill passing or no bill passing, i'd have to support this bill, since at least this would lead to me being able to play again with the coming months. NJ has a healthy population and I think enough people with money that would be able to support a viable poker pool. Of course I would much rather they pool with other states, and I would expect punishments for colluders / cheaters, and I would want sites to have segregated and "Safe and Secure" funds, but if NJ can operate without other states so be it, and if we (the players) have to keep our eyes out for colluders /cheaters as we did in the past so be it, and if I have to keep the minimum in my account (like I did NOT do on FTP unfortunately) then so be it as well.

This bill is far less than perfect, but I can't honestly say it is unacceptable... with the possibility of it being legalized and so soon... how can I not be excited?

I'd recommend that you at least find out how you can participate in the regulations development phase. There will most likely be an opportunity for public input, and you can bear influence on the outcome.

Besides which, a call today or tomorrow to your state reps might be worthwhile too. Ask for the points you want included in the bill for poker (combined player pools with jurisdictions where it is legal; player funds protections). You might contact Joe Brennan of imega.org, who was involved in the original legislation. He might have some ideas to help.

I will make an effort to contact my reps today after i've eaten my wheaties and drank my ovaltine, but if this vote is being held in a few days I would think the bulk of the legislation has already been carved out, no? The wishful thinking optimist in me wants to believe that this bill is being passed in an effort to get the ball rolling immediately and that changes which I believe (and i'm sure you believe) are obviously necessary (safety of funds, punishment of cheaters, etc) would be added on to an amended bill at a later date, no?

@joebrennanjr NJ Senate gaming panel to vote on new i-gaming bill this Thursday (10am); Assembly set to vote Jan 9 on the bill.

greet news! i hope this gets the green light and the bill/regs won't contain provisions that will be too much of a burden on players. with a population of roughly Sweden's, i think intrastate poker will be ok here, unlike in many other small states.

The problem here is that it's not a poker only bill so there's no reason for the casinos to cater to poker players or their problems when other games should make them more money. You don't have to worry about stuff like collusion and cheating other players in blackjack, craps, and roulette.

But....as someone says above. I can't play poker at all now (at least not where I can be sure I'll be able to withdraw) so it's better then nothing.

Because the status quo is not acceptable. When the markets open and there are different choices, the players will determine what sites are most player friendly. I do think there is a big enough player pool in NJ to exceed the current offerings we US players have. Do I think this is the best we can get, no. Will it be a welcome change not having to be concerned with player $ into and out of sites, absolutely.

Good answer.

I should also add as I have stated before. Once a single state gets it up and running it will lead to a federal passage. It may even expedite the process. I have already used my one time last spring, but I will use it again...christie please don't stand in the way this spring!!

I can't wait to start a thread. "I-Poker in New Jersey" ........

Because I live in New Jersey.

I'm in New Jersey too. Really excited, hopefully we get good news soon.

This, I believe, is a misconception. The NV legislation is likely to help push federal legislation, as it is designed to go hand-in-hand with a federal system. The NJ legislation, and all the i-poker bills proposed so far in other states, is likely to hinder the possibility of federal legislation as the bills are protectionist for in-state interests. Every time a state implements a protectionist i-poker system, you have one more state that will oppose a federal blanket system, imo.

Just saw this on pokernews... sounds like at least a glimmer of hope
http://www.pokernews.com/news/2012/0...come-11723.htm