Pappas believes Reid/Kyl bill is written, waiting for the right time/vehicle

[PokerXanadu]

It will be interesting to see if the Reid/Kyl bill includes a Wire Act clarification to cover intrastate online gambling based on the interstate nature of Internet transmissions. If not, the bill will essentially still leave the door open for full-on online casino gambling since for the most part it doesn't depend on interstate activity like online poker does. I don't think Adelson would support a bill that doesn't have such a clarification.

[oldbookguy]

The best option for attachment may come in September with the Continuing Resolution that a framework has been agreed to fund the government through March 2013, the bill will be finalized before the election break and voted on before the re-election break.

This keeps the budget battle out of the election, something both parties want.

Also, this way I-poker cannot be an election issue since a majority of both parties will be agreeing to it.


obg

[sluggger5x]

Creating favorable online gaming legislation will require teamwork from Reid, Heller

Moreover, the chances of marrying it with a gaming measure appear nil. While Reid supported cybersecurity as a potential vehicle for the gaming change, Heller always thought the bill was too “flawed” and “contentious” to be appropriate.

“The only way we can get (an online poker bill) done is we need Republican votes, and we haven’t gotten them yet,” Reid said Tuesday.
“I’m limited in what I can do with Republicans. I’d like a little help from my Republican colleague,” he added in a thinly veiled reference to Heller.

An undated list recently published on a poker forum cites eight more as definite "no" votes.
The Las Vegas Sun conducted an unscientific poll of about 20 of the remaining Republicans, sampling from both moderates and conservatives, that revealed most have not made up their minds about poker and that one — Rand Paul of Kentucky — is likely to support an online poker bill. But many Republican undecideds were clearly leaning toward "no."

"I generally have opposed gambling across the board in all forms. So though I have not seen the bill, I probably would oppose it," said Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, listed as undecided in the poker community’s survey.

"I'm not a big fan of expanding gaming on the Internet, especially for revenue purposes," said Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida.

"Online poker? No, I wouldn’t vote for it," said Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma. "I'd vote against it. I don’t like gambling."

Only three senators the Sun approached outside of leadership circles had already been approached by Heller or Kyl to discuss the topic.

"They just broached the subject with me so I know something about it," said Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia. "Other than that one conversation, I don’t have much information at all."
"I have not talked with them," said Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, who added that he’s "not necessarily for or against" online poker.

A spokesman for Heller said Tuesday evening that he and Kyl "have been working very hard on this ... [and] the feedback to date has been positive." Heller has said he considers the end of the year to be the ultimate deadline for getting a poker bill through Congress.

[gnvsnk]

Sigh...

[LetsGambool]

Really? I think the last week's news has been positive for us. Senators actually speaking in public about the issue, real evidence of action by Reid/Kyl/Heller (to some extent).

Yeah, a bunch of Republicans are against this, yeah we're big underdogs. But we knew that. At least its moved off the back burner.

[sluggger5x]

Originally Posted by oldbookguy

The best option for attachment may come in September with the Continuing Resolution that a framework has been agreed to fund the government through March 2013, the bill will be finalized before the election break and voted on before the re-election break.

This keeps the budget battle out of the election, something both parties want.

Also, this way I-poker cannot be an election issue since a majority of both parties will be agreeing to it.


obg

If Reid were to try this he would need to do it right now and get Senate Republicans to support by the end of the week. I disagree with you about the lame duck. I think there will be opportunities.

[rwperu34]

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

Really? I think the last week's news has been positive for us. Senators actually speaking in public about the issue, real evidence of action by Reid/Kyl/Heller (to some extent).

Yeah, a bunch of Republicans are against this, yeah we're big underdogs. But we knew that. At least its moved off the back burner.

+1

Even the guys saying they are against gambling isn't necessarily terrible for us. When all is said and done, our victory is going to be as much an anti-gambling bill as it is pro-poker.

Originally Posted by sluggger5x

I disagree with you about the lame duck. I think there will be opportunities.

+2

I've never thought that we had a chance at any time but the lame duck and this lame duck is going to be jam packed with must pass legislation. I just don't agree with OBG that poker/gambling is about votes and turning the election. It's about getting something sensical done quietly.

[sluggger5x]

Also here are a few tweets I came across recently. Not really much but good to monitor what's out there...

Bridget Johnson ‏@Bridget_PJM
Today at presser, for example, Harry Reid referred to "Senator Boehner" and muttered something about poker "shenanigans"

Bridget Johnson ‏@Bridget_PJM
@sluggger5x2 sep things: Reid said only way to stop need for DOJ on "shenanigans going on with poker offshore" is GOP votes he doesn't have

Steve Tetreault ‏@STetreaultDC
Sen GOP leader Mitch McConnell ducks reporters asking about #webpoker. Smiles, keeps walking down hall and into his office.

[sluggger5x]

Also fwiw, the cybersecurity bill is stalling in the Senate and will probably go into the "next year" pile.

With the spending resolution agreed on as well it is almost for certain that any poker bill will have to be after the election to nobody's surprise.

[CaliBobby]

Tea Party guy beat the establishment guy in Texas for a senate seat.

Bad in short term for our cause but good long term. As part of the republican party goes more conservative they alienate the more moderates. Tea Party is ultimately bad for the Republicans.

[CaliBobby]

are the republicans just going to fillibuster every bill? democrats have a majority in the senate. just pass the thing.

[halff]

I am not sure that the Cyber Security bill is a good vehicle anymore. The Republicans did not like it very much to begin with and now some controversial amendments are being saddled onto it such as the abortion amendment proposed by Utah Senator Mike Lee and the Gun Control Amendment proposed by Senator Frank Lautenberg. These unrelated amendments seem to hurt the success of the bill and I am sure that if an online poker amendment were also tacked onto it it would not help its chances of passing. Just my opinion of course.

[ScreaminAsian]

Originally Posted by CaliBobby

are the republicans just going to fillibuster every bill?

they will continue to do this or threaten to do this for every bill that may effect the country positively in any way.

Originally Posted by CaliBobby

democrats have a majority in the senate. just pass the thing.

dems need 60 votes to break a filibuster. R's control all the action in the senate because they don't care if the country goes to hell. actually, if the country does go to hell, they'll blame it on obama, so it's win/win.

[big gilute]

makes me sick

[lilprog]

[B]"Online poker? No, I wouldn’t vote for it," said Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma. "I'd vote against it. I don’t like gambling."

THEN GTFO of oklahoma. Your state has more casinos then 7-11s....