Lol made my day.

There is now an independent (grassroots) organization that recently established a standard, common set of protocols directly addressing these type of problems, no? They are called NCLGS.

http://capwiz.com/pokerplayersallian...L/10666288711I

Next time I reach out to my state Reps, I am going to reference them and their ideas. Their whole purpose as I understand it is to help streamline the whole process of online poker for states serious about it. And they also provide guidance for states on most efficient/profitable way for interstate pooling whenever they then consider that too. Perhaps for those of you in Cali, you can reach out to your Reps pushing for this too. It can only help in terms of expediting the bureacratic process over there. You're so close but so far. Nevertheless, there is nothing to lose and everything to gain by suggesting this to your Reps.

On compromise there does seem to be some momentum starting to build. Rincon who is a partner with Caesars and Pala published a letter to Gatto/Jones-Sawyer. Both expressing need for compromise and softening on Bad Actor track issues.

http://www.pechanga.net/content/rinc...LnjaXM.twitter

Hopefully, Pechanga will signal some willingness to move legislation forward. I think there is a big conference coming up that might clarify if more progress can be made.

Additional analysis and a listing of the camps:

http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/154...tion-changing/

Tribal Moves on Tracks, ‘Bad Actors’ Does Not Bode Well for Online Poker

State officials who prefer anonymity? God bless America...

Same ship different year. It's beginning to sound like a broken record. Who decided to give these Indian clowns power?

And it's obvious these high ranking officials want to be anonymous since they're slimy and don't want to be exposed.

Nobody 'gave' them power. They are active, they spend money lobbying. Of course they will have more influence than those who do not.

People abdicate their power willingly, by not being involved, not lobbying for change, not supporting candidates who share their vision, not voting . . . .

'the world is run by those who show up'

And the US is run by those with deep enough pockets.

Curt, I admire the work you've done in WA and you've inspired me to take more action here in CA. But don't you think with a few million in the right pockets your efforts would have produced stronger results?

Sorry if I seem negative or unpatriotic. Tough to stay positive when such rampant cronyism is so obvious and the general public ultimately doesn't care.

Money would have helped . . .

But you can't just bribe your way to success, pay off a few guys and instant results. It may seem like that is how it works, but it's not.

Keep dreaming...

Seems to me like you can bribe your way to success.

fyp Google Max Weber.

The distinction between the US being run by those with deep enough pockets and it being run for those with deep enough pockets carries political weight under the right circumstances.

The general public does not generally care, but, there is an anti-elitism theme within the US political landscape.

However,in terms of the politics of online poker, that theme simply is immaterial; online poker lacks a material connection to the general population. This is especially so in California state politics surrounding this issue.

OTOH, the PPA is off to CPAC soon, where it might be able to cobble together a defensive coalition of individual liberty/State Rights support against the Federal Government running the US to prohibit online gambling, at the behest of someone tied to B&M gambling with a deep pocket.

Politicians are bought, literally. I have a friend that's running for a city council and he is constantly asking for donations. And this is for being a city council.

If I were to make a $10,000 donation, I'm willing to bet I can have him in my pocket since he owes me. This is how politics works in every level. Let's not embellish and romanticize about their cause. Politicians are basically white collar escorts...

Money does matter in politics. That makes it easy for some to draw an inference that money drives all politics, which would be incorrect. Money talks as loudly as it does precisely because too many do not speak up and advocate for positions in which they believe.

An organized advocacy effort can go a long way to closing the money gap. We saw that in late 2014 when Adelson failed to get RAWA through the lame duck Congress. That was no dream.

When was Black Friday? How is our progress? How close are we to having interstate poker for all 50 states?

One man, Sheldon Adelson, vs the whole poker community. I say Adelson is winning. He doesn't have to pass any laws. He just has to deter laws that permit online poker.

And in California, politicians want to be anonymous since they're getting paid by the tribes. But of course if we show up, things will change.

I said money talks, and talks loudly. That's why we all have to keep speaking up as well.

Adelson does have to pass a law. He has to pass a ban through Congress to keep states from moving forward. We're the ones who actually are on defense on the Hill. No action on the Hill is a victory for poker.

It's the opposite at the states, but Adelson can't hold back poker forever. Without a federal ban, more states will move. It's just a matter of time, so long as we all keep up the pressure.

And then there were 3 in assembly and 1 in the senate. Only shell bills to be fleshed out later ... info can be found at http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/155...oker-new-bill/

The full public statement by Senator Hall and Assemblyman Gray on their new ipoker bill:

Have Hall and Gray been active in the iPoker discussions in the past?

(Blog) Dave Palermo: I-Poker Prospects Looks Dim Despite Gray/Hall Alliance

is it at all possible to start a grassroots campaign to get a law passed? how would we go about doing something like that? is it at all possible to do something like organize a statewide petition to get a law to be passed? i dont know how politics work but i'd imagine there should be a way for the people to organize and get things done when politicians cant.

Sure, there is always a way in our great democracy. To cut the politicians out of the process, you just need to organize a petition to get the issue added as a voter referendum on an upcoming ballot. This usually requires a certain minimum number of signatures in each voting district (although I am not familiar specifically with CA state rules) by the filing deadline. Then you need advertising dollars to promote your vote to the public, and counter the ads of the opposition. The total cost will likely run well into 8 figures for a chance at success.

By definition, a grassroots campaign starts with the people. People have to come together, put in the work, raise funds, take meetings . . .

It is certainly within the realm of possibility, but it is very, very hard to get poker players to step up. I think you can look at what was done in Washington State as an example of just how little grassroots support there is for our issue. Only a handful of players even participated in the effort, we couldn't raise any money, and despite the fact that we managed to get a bill introduced, support didn't come from any quarter, and a lot of work was done for naught.

My point of view is colored by bitter disappointment, but it does illustrate the fact that players are not engaged in the issue in numbers anywhere near the level needed, and perhaps more importantly, the gaming interests involved have far more influence, and while they appreciate our loyalty, they aren't doing much to support grassroots efforts.

**** Friday #Fight4Poker ****

• Let’s send prefilled, editable tweets to nine members of California's Senate Governmental Organization Committee:
⇒ Sen. Isadore Hall (Chair): http://spredd.it/i2Ec0fDU
⇒ Sen. Tom Berryhill (Vice Chair): http://spredd.it/KGa5s78l
⇒ Sen. Marty Block: http://spredd.it/UfWO2fFb
⇒ Sen. Ted Gaines: http://spredd.it/6hS12a4f
⇒ Sen. Cathleen Galgiani: http://spredd.it/1c4R6E6u
⇒ Sen. Ed Hernandez: http://spredd.it/cwPZ9hfm
⇒ Sen. Ricardo Lara: http://spredd.it/d7e4U7KV
⇒ Sen. Mike McGuire: http://spredd.it/55fxPG0i
⇒ Sen. Andy Vidak: http://spredd.it/515HIeRJ

• Let’s tweet & favorite pro-poker messages in reply to a tweet by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA). Either write your own reply (best) or copy & paste one of the following examples (but try to edit even these a bit):
- Please oppose HR 707, a bill that strips states of their #TenthAmendment right to authorize online poker.
- For consumer protection, mandated age verification & liberty, please support the right of states to authorize online poker.
- Congress rejected instate online poker bans in '06. HR 707 restores nothing. It's a new ban. Please oppose HR 707.
⇒ https://twitter.com/RepGoodlatte/sta...27579816136706

• Please tweet, share & favorite today's action plan, and please reply here with "done", "tweeted," "posted," etc. to encourage others:
⇒ Twitter: http://spredd.it/q0dvaFS5
⇒ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PokerDailyAc...41201165925675

Thanks for participating!

It is pretty shameful that elected officials are essentially sitting on the fence while special interest groups argue about what the policy should be.

It is pretty much consensus that online poker should be regulated, it's not a question of should we or could we, but one of how.

We elect leaders to LEAD, they should just tune out the lobbyists at this point, get down to debate, and vote on the bills. I would encourage CA players to write your legislator and tell them to step up and make a tough decision, that is what they are hired to do.