Individual State opt-out prediction thread - Page 21 - Poker Legislation

Two Plus Two Forums Poker News & Discussion General Poker Discussion

Individual State opt-out prediction thread

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 21 of 21

11 16 17 18 19 20 21

Page 21 of 21

11 16 17 18 19 20 21

01-11-2012 , 05:56 AM

#501

grumpy64

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 7,621

Aren't states automatically opted in if a federal bill is passed? Then each state will have the option to opt out?

Quote

01-11-2012 , 09:22 AM

#502

Curtlow

old hand

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,383

Quote:

Originally Posted by grumpy64

Aren't states automatically opted in if a federal bill is passed? Then each state will have the option to opt out?

If that's the way the bill is written. They could make it the other way.

Quote

01-18-2012 , 03:59 AM

#503

sajeffe

banned

Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 5,058

Without having federal legislation, these are the states we know of that are either working on, or looking at, online gambling:

District of Columbia,
California,
Nevada,
Iowa,
Illinois,
Ohio,
Connecticut,
New Jersey,
Florida.

Any corrections?

Congress better move on this if they don't want a whole bunch of different laws and regulations throughout.

Last edited by sajeffe; 01-18-2012 at 04:03 AM. Reason: Spelled out the states.

Quote

01-18-2012 , 07:06 AM

#504

PokerXanadu

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 10,583

Quote:

Originally Posted by sajeffe

District of Columbia,
California,
Nevada,
Iowa,
Illinois,
Ohio,
Connecticut,
New Jersey,
Florida.
New York

FYP

Quote

01-18-2012 , 10:44 AM

#505

billythekid357

enthusiast

Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 84

Ohio-we've recently passed limited casino license bill allowing casinos in Cleveland(owned by Cavs owner Dan Gilbert), Toledo, Columbus, & Cincy. These casinos are currently under construction. The bill was passed due to concern of gambling money going to neighboring states(Pa,Indiana, Michigan). Ohio, like most is revenue starved and I believe will opt in.

Quote

01-18-2012 , 12:26 PM

#506

Guest_1048

centurion

Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 147

Penn National Gaming, which is opposed to online poker, is involved in Ohio's new casinos.

Quote:

...in April, Penn National executives told analysts during the company quarterly earnings conference call that they opposed efforts to legalize Internet poker even though Chairman Peter Carlino speculated legalization is probably inevitable.

http://www.lvrj.com/business/m-resor...8.html?ref=088

I didn't expect them to resist legalization until the director of the Ohio Lottery Commission drooled all over himself in print at the thought of his own monopoly:

Quote:

“We want to be in the forefront of being able to generate revenue for the lottery commission."

Quote:

“An Ohio resident could not sit on their computer and play the New York games. So, from that perspective, we don’t see a large competitive threat.”

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnat....html?page=all

Meanwhile, although I think business-friendly Gov. Kasich could be an ally, the Ohio House Republicans, who control the state house, are a different story.

I predict a difficult struggle for any form of regulated online poker in Ohio.

Quote

01-18-2012 , 12:36 PM

#507

apology7

adept

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 727

An intrastate monopoly run by the Ohio lottery would be a joke.

In regards to Penn National having a b&m monopoly, Ohio also has two Caesars properties that are almost ready, one in Cleveland, one in Cincinnati.

If a federal bill does not pass soon, I fear it will be 'game over' for anything resembling a quality i-poker experience.

Quote

01-18-2012 , 12:42 PM

#508

Guest_1048

centurion

Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 147

Quote:

Originally Posted by apology7

In regards to Penn National having a b&m monopoly, Ohio also has two Caesars properties that are almost ready, one in Cleveland, one in Cincinnati.

You're right, Penn National doesn't have a monopoly. I edited it out before I saw your reply. I was under the assumption Penn National would be running Gilbert's properties, but I guess that didn't pan out.