Commerce Casino board members Tom Malkasian and Haig Papaian issued the following statement today to outline Commerce's position on Internet poker legislation.

"Poker players deserve to know the real facts so let us be clear: We support online poker and we are working hard to make sure it will benefit all Americans. America's poker community should be united in opposing the Frank legislation that would ship jobs, revenue and taxes beyond our communities. We need to work together to keep American dollars at home.

Federal and state regulation of online poker is coming. To date, there have been more than 45 federal Internet gambling bills proposed and 60 state bills in the U.S. We can either fight to ensure that poker players' interests are legitimately protected or allow illegal foreign operators, who are siphoning millions of American dollars out of this country, to dominate the U.S. market.

(emphasis mine)

Entire press release

That's actually the Aug. 27th release.

It seemed they support online poker only if they get a CA monopoly and only if there is no interstate poker for the rest of the nation.

I posted it in response to all the posts saying Commerce wouldn't commit suicide by supporting online poker, players would leave if online poker were legal, etc.

I appeared on this week's 2+2 PokerCast to discuss the Commerce Casino issue. It starts at time point 2:24:40

The amount of disinformation in this thread is mind boggling.

Such as?

They committed suicide...

I don't understand how part of the poker community can attack another part of the poker community. I'm disappointed, Commerce. Your actions are hurting more than just your own customers (although that should be enough of an outrage).

Signed

signed and sent an email.

Commerce Casino CEO, President, and Chairman of the Board Haig Papaian discussed this at http://www.pokernewsdaily.com/commer...ing-bill-15626. Here are two responses that really got my attention:

I'm just amazed at how Commerce Casino sees us solely as a revenue source, and how they have no problem saying so.

Why should Commerce be irritated that Californians go to Vegas? Surely Papaian should be able see that he can address this by improving his establishment to encourage people to patronize his business. That's how the free market works, after all. It seems he doesn't really see us as customers. Rather, he seems to see us as a financial resource.

To me, poker players are analogous to diners at a steakhouse. The business exists to serve us. To Commerce Casino, it seems they think we're the steak cows, and the business exists to provide profit to the state of California and to the owners of Commerce Casino. At least these guys could pretend their online position has anything to do with providing us with a service. Instead, they speak only of how much money they plan to take from us, as if we should be glad to give it.

agreed....i signed....
not that i go to commerce much from Nor Cal, just special events. i won't be going anymore until they change their position....

you know the other funny part is commerce could actually expand their business if the partnered up with the right online sites to run feeders into their live MTTs. its like the movie industry opposing VCRs when they came out....

Haig Papaian --It's like he doesn't see poker players as being different from any other gamblers. --As in gamblers go to Casinos and lose money to him.

It's as if he's laughing us off like I would laugh off someone who was trying to fight for the rights of slot machine or bingo players...

And since he seems to see poker players just as other "gamblers"(revenue sources), and gamblers are supposed to lose, i doubt he sees a problem at having the rake at 10% or more, or even at a level that would make the games unbeatable for event the best players. In fact, he probably feels like rakes are not high enough if poker players can consistently win.... .... kind of like how casinos throw out blackjack Card counters, he's probably not very interested in what 'pro poker players' might say.

For someone like Haig Papaian, who only seems to care about the bottom line, I think we are either going to have to force him to see that he is going to lose money by taking the position that he and the Commerce have, or force him to see that he could be making more money supporting the Frank bills and similar legislation-like when the record industry realized that they should be selling music online digitally, rather than wasting time trying to shut it down.

Thanks Engineer for all you have been doing. -- For all of us poker players who are not/can't be that involved in the fighting right now(for whatever reasons.) We are counting on people like you to do most of the fighting for us. Please keep it up!

I have a ton of respect for the posts you make and the work you do on this stuff, but this leaves me just shaking my head. Of course a business sees it's customers as a "financial resource". WTF else are they supposed to see us as?

Businesses aren't here to "provide a service", they're here to make a profit by providing a service, and I don't understand the notion that being frank about that is shameful.

Sure Haig sees us as a resource but the fact that he's essentially trying to close an open market so he can over-rake the pots (like he and his SoCal casino buddies already do in live games) is where he is out of line. They're supposed to see us as humans living in a free market not treat us like North Korean peasants.

Excellent work PPA. I live only a few miles from Commerce, play poker nearly every day and haven't set foot in a SoCal casino in months because of this ridiculous stance they've taken. I'll be driving right by Commerce in a few days on my way to Vegas TO PLAY POKER AT CASINOS THAT APPRECIATE MY BUSINESS. Thanks for bringing this to light and thanks for fighting for us.

What other states recognize poker as a game of skill and not a game of chance besides California?
I am glad to see that some of the players here will be boycotting Commerce. I know I am going there next time I am in.
In my opinion it is really stupid of any casino not to join up with internet poker but oppose it. Just create your own site and try to bring in more players.

the poker community needs more like you

....

OK morons....while you all fight for your rights.....who is 2 of the board of directors on PPA? Hmmm...Lederer and Ferguson....who started the PPA? Oh right Lederer and Ferguson....who owns the rights to the software for Fulltilt? Oh right....same two huh....who do you think gives a **** if you lose the right to online poker? Oh right....the two that are under federal investigation for "just owning the rights to the software" but nothing to do with online gaming. How often do you see them playing online poker? Oh right....another stupid question! Does the term "lobbyist" mean anything to you? Let me help "a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest"

Don't kid yourself....the PPA is nothing more than a lobbyist group....if it was it would be put together by guys like me and you.

Love threads like this....clueless idiots fighting for their rights....LMAO

learn more.

Yes, all businesses exist by making a profit by providing a service. That's a great thing, in fact.

What I said is that Commerce's comments don't reflect that. They provide no reasons that players should prefer their proposed site to the current sites.

signed

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40575163...-capitol_hill/

Two big Las Vegas casino companies that pumped more than $650,000 into Nevada Sen. Harry Reid’s re-election would benefit from a controversial Internet gambling measure that the Senate majority leader is attempting to tuck into the massive tax cut bill, according to lobbyists and Senate staff members familiar with the measure.

The draft bill, which Reid has been circulating among colleagues over the last week, would permit U.S. casino companies to set up their own Internet poker sites. The measure, first reported by Bloomberg News, would allow them for the first time to tap into a multi-billion-dollar online gambling market that is booming overseas.

More Politics news First Thoughts: Scare tactics
Updated 12 minutes ago 12/9/2010 2:37:04 PM +00:00 In what has been the most vigorous (and best?) sales job in months, the Obama administration began to use a little fear on Wednesday to sell its tax-cut agreement. Full story
Reid's 'Net bet bill would aid his casino backers Updated 35 minutes ago 12/9/2010 2:14:42 PM +00:00 Massive budget bill faces opposition in Senate Updated 35 minutes ago 12/9/2010 2:14:30 PM +00:00 Likely GOP hopefuls line up against nuclear treaty Updated 35 minutes ago 12/9/2010 2:14:18 PM +00:00 Senate prospects dim for young immigrants bill But NBC News has learned that the proposal was crafted to make sure that the first licenses would be granted to casinos in states with large and “established” regulatory programs overseeing more than $2 billion in gambling revenue, guaranteeing that big Las Vegas casino companies would have a leg up over potential competitors, especially Indian tribes in other states, according to two lobbyists familiar with the provisions of the bill that Reid has been circulating.

Among the biggest boosters of the Reid bill, the sources said, are MGM Resorts International and Harrah’s, now called Caesars Entertainment, both of which were substantial backers of Reid during his re-election campaign against Republican Sharron Angle.

As NBC News reported last month , MGM donated $300,000 to the Patriot Majority PAC, a so-called “super PAC” set up by a former communications director for Reid that ran a series of hard hitting attack ads against Angle during the final weeks of the campaign.

Caesars gave another $75,000 to the Patriot Majority PAC (whose controversial ad campaign included one that likened Angle to the notorious Chilean dictator and “human rights violator” Gen. Augusto Pinochet.)

In addition, MGM executives, employees and its political action committee gave $192,450 to Reid during the 2010 election cycle, making the company the largest single source of campaign funds for the senator, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Harrah’s/Caesars donated $83,100, making it Reid’s fourth-largest campaign contributor, the CRP data shows.

“It looks like it’s so ‘dead of night,’ I don’t see how Reid can get away with this,” said one senior Republican staffer familiar with Reid’s proposal. “It’s just pure political payback for the support the casinos gave him during the campaign.”

A spokesman for Reid declined to comment on the Internet gambling bill Wednesday. But a top MGM official vigorously defended Reid’s proposal and dismissed the notion that it was a political payoff for the company’s support during the campaign.

“Call it what you want to call it — if it brings revenues and jobs into the United States, it’s the right thing to do,” said Allan Feldman, senior vice president for public affairs for MGM Resorts. “As a country, we’ve allowed jobs and tax revenues to be outsourced to Europe and parts of the Caribbean."

Feldman also said it makes sense to have companies in states like Nevada, which have a long history of regulating gambling, get the initial licenses. "This would put Nevada and New Jersey into a position to help foster the development of what could be the Silicon Valley of gaming,” he said.

Asked for comment, Jan Jones, senior vice president of communications for Caesar’s, said: "Along with many others in the gaming industry, we have been working on effective Internet legislation for over three years.”

Gambling lobbyists say one reason for Reid’s and the industry’s sense of urgency is that the chances of getting any Internet gambling measure through Congress will diminish after January, when Republicans take over the House. Some key Republicans, including Rep. Spencer Bachus, who is in line to be chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, have said they are dead-set against legislation that would legalize any form of online gambling and some staffers say that Reid’s attempt to circulate his proposal at the last minute without any public hearings could backfire.

But Reid and industry backers of the measure say it may have one major selling point as lawmakers struggle with reducing the federal deficit: It could bring in between $10 billion to $40 billion or more in new tax revenue over the next 10 years, according to supporters. For that reason, and others, Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has long been a proponent of Internet gambling and the idea recently picked up key support from a member of President Obama’s Deficit Reduction Commission — Andrew Stern, former president of Service Employees International Union. The SEIU is another big backer of Reid, and contributed $400,000 to Patriot Majority PAC.

Ironically, Reid — and some Las Vegas casino companies — supported an earlier 2006 law that cracked down on Internet gambling, making it illegal to use credit cards to transfer funds for online gaming. At the time, some of the casino companies feared that Internet gambling would drain business away from potential customers.

But in the past few years, overseas Internet gambling sites have grown dramatically, causing billions of dollars in revenue to migrate to offshore Internet sites. Now, most in the industry have concluded that the Internet gambling business is here to say and they might as well start to get a piece of the action.