Only place I've seen info so far is at www.gamblingcompliance.com (subscription needed). The abstract says:

Gogogogogo! Of course that's IF its good legislation.

Nice to at least keep the other side on defense, but Im not optimistic that its going to be brought to vote in a Spencer Bauchus lead committee although Im sure it would pass committee if it was.

Nice to see they still care, but I'm guessing its a futile effort until Jan 2013. This and Kyl's retirement are nice little pockets of sunshine though.

Financial Services is not the ONLY committee that such a bill can be assigned to. In fact, there are ways to make sure it never goes before Baccus at all until it hits a floor vote.

I do not know if that is yet the plan, just saying it's possible.

Skallagrim

John Campbell is a very libertarian Republican (and a very articulate, seasoned Congressman). This is great news. He was endorsed by PPA Pac as well.

From the stupid question dept:

I'm assuming the fact that Campbell's from CA doesn't necessarily mean that the new bill will bear any resemblance to the hideous one that the CA state legislature introduced last year?

Wow, the PPA going to CPAC is paying dividends already!

One outers come in, I just think we shouldnt plan on hitting them. Maybe there are ways around Bachus, but Frank couldnt get a floor vote on a standalone bill with a big majority so I'm pretty skeptical. I think getting this bill through some committee again is a reasonable goal for the next two years, but am pretty skeptical of getting a billed passed through any other channel besides Harry Reid strongarming it into unrelated legislation.

I don't think we have anything especially to worry about from Campbell. From what I've seen, I think his bill will be far better than the Reid bill and at least comparable to the B Frank bill, if not better, for players. It will though probably build on what was able to get through the House committee vote last year. My fingers are crossed.

Why do we think this year's bill will be better besides hoping it to be so? What specific player improvements do we expect, and why? Im expecting something that looks like what got out of committee last year, possibly with a blackout attached since the Reid negotiations established that as standard. I'm not expecting more player friendly opt-out provisions or taxes or anything. What am I missing that we think improved from last year?

Schwing! I totally didn't see that one coming. I have no reason to believe this will go any farther than Frank's bill last year, but this is still a pleasant surprise. Can't wait to hear more details.

Thanks PPA for any role you played in this and will play in the future.

+1

Ironically, I happen to think the odds of "a bill" passing on the Hill markedly improved since last year, when the clock was sure to run out.

Whether "a bill that is passable" is one that poker players would support has been questioned, even by a PPA Board member.

I said it before and I will say it again. When politicians see a big pot of money, they try to find a way to get thier hands on it. They have to realize by now how much FT/Stars are making. Why would they not want that to be located on shore so they can get thier hands on 30% of the profits?

GC and Pokerati both report that the bill is expected to be not dissimilar from Frank's bill, fwiw.