Good news is, it would likely get some real dollars behind reforming gambling tax law and accelerate the timeline to fix it.

Bad news is, would delay any Federal or State scheme from really operating correctly for an additional ___ months or years.

You might want to take another look at the ObamaCare case, while the ruling got more attention for the court using the General Welfare clause to rewrite the individual mandate as a tax, even after saying that it made improper use of the Commerce Clause by mandating commerce (health care purchases), the opt-out provision for States was struck down.

Since 'governments don't tax governments', SCOTUS couldn't fall back on that argument to uphold the 'opt-in or else' State provision of ObamaCare, and if the court won't do it for Health Care, one would be rather negligent to write a statute on the presumption that they might do it for poker.

A must read.

McConnell A Key Figure In Internet Poker Debate, Say Lobbyists

^^

That makes me feel so good. At least this part:

Going to write him again right now. Also anyone in KY that sends him and email or letter, he loves the horse racing industry and imo we should let him know Ipoker would only help horse racing, as an example how Churchill Downs bought bluff.

This post is really positive for passage of federal legislation. It quotes Republicans and does NOT rely on Dean Heller or Jon Porter as a source. Although McConnell has complained that Harry Reid "thinks he is LBJ", he has interested folks at home, aside from TE even.

It is a fact that Twin Spires (Churchill Downs) really wants to enter online gaming, and not just in Kentucky. First, they bought Bluff Magazine, for a substantial premium. Second, they have applied for Nevada licensing.

I am back to seeing some light for federal movement in the lame duck, it just has to come from the otjher side of the aisle from Harry. I'll even go up to a 33% chance of federal passage through the Senate in 2012, with a lesser chance, say 25% in the House due to the clock running and a lot on the plates.

(FWIW, if Obama wins, and there is no lame duck legislation passed, look for an Executive Order regarding State compacting or international player pooling perhaps.)

So the President has the authority to mandate regulated online poker that will allow US to participate in games that share an open global market ?

My political passions aside this is one of the few things I have heard that makes sense and may be the only thing that keeps me living in the country I was born....

Most of all the proposed legislation I have read about is total and complete duplicity with regards to every other idealism the progressive leadership in this country preaches that world open markets are best for all of our future yet these so called leaders put together poker legislation that actually isolates the US market. ABSURD political hypocrisy !

Sorry, but DQ isn't saying that. Rather, he's suggesting that the president can authorize via an executive order interstate and international compacting among states that authorize online poker. In other words, the states have to pass legislation to participate.

Also, authorizing of interstate and international commerce and compacts is an enumerated power of Congress, so it will be interesting to see if an executive order can make that happen (I imagine he'd say Congress did not prohibit it so they won't be taking enforcement measures against states choosing to compact).

All that being said, there's not even been a hint that Obama would consider that. Perhaps we would...who knows?

Much of this has come down to enforcement. Congress cannot figure out how to go after offshore colluders, for example.

Oh you mean how they enforce WTO rules against the likes of Chinese companies that break almost every international law there is ??

You honestly sound like a politician Rich, I think you have a bright future lol

I didn't say I agree with it. I'd prefer international play. I simply explained how it's seen by some on the Hill.

Clearly a Nevada company, like say the Venetian, can and does transact a gambling business with foreign companies without an Act of Congress. So, yes, aside from sports betting, there doesn't seem to be much online that is federally prohibited under the Wire Act. Especially when Congress arguably HAS acted to authorize igaming among some consenting jurisdictions. Read the UIGEA carefully.

So, how much of a stretch would it be for the Executive Branch, at Harry Reid's request, to sprinkle Holy Water on (a) multi-state compacts or (b) States allowing their licensees to transact business involving international player pools ?

It isn't glamorous, but it is feasible and would be an improvement on the current state of affairs.

(If this route proves to be the path to online poker, please forward Al D'Amato's $250K paycheck for 2013 to me, instead of "blowing a bunch of money on D.C.".)

Cant executive orders be revoked by the next president?

Agreed (of course)

Unfortunately, all UIGEA does is exempt state-authorized gaming (subject to specific provisions including age verification) from the provisions of UIGEA itself. That being said, if I were president I'd issue an executive order clarifying that Congress has not banned interstate or international gaming -- even when given the chance to speak to the issue in UIGEA.

Not much.

What makes you think Obama would ever do that, though?

Sen. D'Amato never received a paycheck of that amount from PPA. PPA used to use his lobbying firm -- which performed actual lobbying work -- and the amount appeared commingled.

upon inauguration, the new president of the united states is told that all presidents since john adams have been made to be immortal in an occult post-inauguration ceremony, typically performed by the chief justice (if he's a satanist) wearing his billowing ultrablack robes, in a room of only freemasons.

this started a longstanding unwritten tradition where all presidents except jimmy carter respect the policy decisions of all presidents of the united states, past and future, because you can never know which ex-president decides he's seriously got nothing better to do with eternity besides holding grudges and fulfilling vendettas. and that probably includes all of them. plus i'm sure they're mighty pissed off, seeing as a failed prison colony in the moon probably wasn't what they were all expecting. because of this, even the most bitter political enemies in american history have respected the tradition and have kept silent on the politics of the following administrations once they're "in the club"; because they know what's good for them.

fun fact: dick cheney is immortal too, but now he's lookin for fights. this is an artist's representation of what will happen to dick cheney when his first body dies and his consciousness is transported to the decaying prison colony inside the moon:

This was one of the four issues Pappas publicly took issue with in the proposed bill. Are you personally lobbying for international player pools? It seems to me the majority of players (on this forum at least) would prefer to leave it US only, at least for the first few years.

I sure hope he is. Why would anyone want to LIMIT the player pool? (More fish???? The same US fish will be there from the US, just perhaps harder to find.)

There are plenty of us who do not want international pools. I'm sure almost all of us would be cash game players.

Basically my belief is that international US based sites would have a much easier time attracting international regs than international rec players. Second, a huge problem with the current games IMO is that people from countries with low wages grind the micros endlessly to make a living. Money flowing out of poker economy at micro level is bad news. Bless their hearts for finding a way to make money, but I don't need their liquidity to play a cash game if federal poker happens, thus they are a huge negative to me.

Do you even play online poker? Maybe if one had the ability to play an unlimited number of tables there is some merit to what you say. But I'd prefer to fill up my tables with recreational players rather than sifting through the Euro-shark infested tables for one or two good rec. players.

Apart from that, as Rich said the ability to enforce anti-cheating measures would be greatly diminished with ROW players. Moreover, the government should want to keep disposable income inside the US. You'd be a fool if you didn't think there would be a heavy drain of money leaving the US if Euro-sharks were allowed to play with US rec. players who are brand new to online poker.

same fish, more sharks, thus less $ for each USA shark.

quality>>>quantity

It's gonna be amazing without the scumbag rats from Russia, China, and eastern Europe.

In the past few years, before Stars/FT were ousted from the US, I found just as many fish from outside the US as within it. Also, tournaments are 1000 times better with bigger fields.

Larger communities enable more types of games as well. Did I not read recently that Merge was abandoning limit games? Imagine trying to get a Omaha Hi Lo game at Cake?

If it ends up that US sites can accept international players then US players can play on international sites, correct?

Because we all want to make more $/hour.

I had never thought of it from that angle.


Once the market is fully developed, there will be no problem with liquidity. The only way we're dealing with Merge/Cake type liquidity is if there are only a few states involved and one of them is not California, New York, or Florida.

I personally prefer an international pool for increased liquidity and to help establish a principle of cross-border play (with hope that offshore sites would one day be authorized to offer services to US players), but I've not personally lobbied for it. As you mention, there is a wide diversity of opinion on that topic here. As the player relations chief, I lobby for players.

IMO it's a moot point as far as federal legislation goes. If legislation passes Congress this year, it is very unlikely to authorize any international play.

That's because 99% of recreational players in the USA thought it was illegal and impossible to deposit.

Imagine the difference when its expressly legal, easy to deposit, and there is advertising everywhere.

+∞

This. I've had a countless number of times of people asking me how to deposit and them not feeling uncomfortable about giving a offshore website their banking information and only wanted to deposit with a credit card. The other big ones that came and stopped people from playing where thinking the game was rigged since it some offshore company and not under US regulation, afraid of sites not paying out if they won, seeing a commercial that directed them to the .net site and not being able to play for real money, and thinking that it was illegal for them to play online poker and could get in trouble for it.