As many of you here know, there were two bills active during the prior legislation session which included a provision that made online poker a felony for players in the state of Massachusetts. One bill proposed by Governor Patrick which would allow three casinos to be built in MA was defeated while a bill allowing for slot machines at the local tracks was submitted by House Rep David Flynn but never brought to the floor for a vote.

Two major things have changed over the last six months. First, Speaker of the House Sal DiMasi is now under fire over some ethics issues and may not be speaker come January. He was the most powerful politician in the state last Spring and killed the casino bill due to his long stated opposition to expanded gambling and a personal feud with Governor Patrick which looks to have simmered down. He also did not allow the slots bill to come to the floor for a vote.

The second major change is that MA voted to ban dog racing via ballot referendum yesterday. This means that the dog tracks will essentially be out of business by 2010 at the latest without legislation allowing for slot machines at the track, which Rep. Flynn has already vowed to bring to the floor this year following last nights vote to ban racing.

Given the fact that we also have major budget problems in MA at this point, there is a great chance that gambling bills are coming to the floor this legislative session with a much better chance of passing than in last year's session.

IMO it is MUCH EASIER to fight now to make sure that language against online poker is not included in any gambling bill than to fight to get the language out of the bill when it comes to the floor. I would humbly suggest that anyone from MA contact both Governor Patrick and Rep. David Flynn to let them know you will not support any gambling initiatives that include this language.

The PPA has had a lobbyist presence in MA and an active state rep who did a great job leading us in the last fight, I am curious if they have any thoughts about what might be coming down the pike in MA. I would rather be proactive and fight this now rather than reactive and wait for a bill.

Anyone from MA with any thoughts or ideas please feel free to share them.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/pol...ome&position=1

Bumping for potential bad news for us. While Flynn is an ardent proponent of expanded gaming, in particular he is a key supporter of the Raynham dog track in his district, his slots bill proposal last session criminalized online poker in MA making playing a felony punishable by a fine of $30K.

If he is named Speaker of the House there is a 100% chance that he will bring a bill to the floor of the House for a vote on slots at the track as it is literally his number one priority (current Speaker DiMasi has killed this in the past with the aid of anti-gambling committee head Daniel Bosley from North Adams). That concept already has the votes in the State Senate. The governor has said last year he would veto a slots bill as he doesn't think it bring the same benefits to the state that full casinos do. The budget has worsened and dog racing has been banned so he may be more amenable to a slots bill in order to save jobs at the tracks and bring in much needed revenue to the state.

I know there is a lot going on obviously, but does the PPA still have a lobbyist presence in MA? Has the PPA met with David Flynn about the language in the bill proposed last session? This will be 100 times easier to fight as Rep. Flynn drafts his bill than it will be come voting time, and last year's bill if passed makes us toast in Massachusetts.

http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/hous...df/ht00357.pdf

Link to last year's bill, the offending clause is on page 34 of the bill, got the fine slightly wrong its punishable by 2 years in prison and a fine of up to $25K.

Great point, that crossed my mind when the dog tracks ballot question passed. I believe you are talking about Robert Rice, who is very supportive of our cause. He is actually my representative and won handily in the latest election.

Great point to start early, letting them know that we would support the bill if the criminalization of online poker clause is not in there. Better now than after the fact.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.ph...e_requirements

With marijuana possession (less than one ounce) being decriminalized, the thought crossed my mind to create a ballot question in Massachusetts even before any law hit the fan. Massachusetts is the easiest state in the country to do so:

Signatures in Massachusetts must equal 3% of votes cast for governor in the last election. This is the lowest percentage for a constitutional amendment required for any state.

We would need a little of 65,000 signatures. We can't have playing online poker a crime with penalties harsher than drunk driving, while walking around with weed having the same penalty as not wearing a seatbelt can we?

Great idea, I think getting it passed will be an uphill battle but we should talk with Randy about this and see if its feasible.

I'll sign! Also cheers on legal weed.........

You'd think they would be dying to get poker bringing in revenue. How can you want to allow slot machines, the definition of mindless and degenerate gambling, and want to ban poker?

Just a bump as Speaker DiMasi was quoted in the Boston Globe today saying he is "not saying no" at all to casinos in the context of an article on the state's fiscal trouble. Hopefully the PPA has been working through their lobbyist behind the scenes to make sure the criminalization provision found in the '07 proposal does not make it into any '09 casino proposal

Maybe our US Reps/Sens could be of help too...

Got this response from Representative Capuano awhile back:

A friend indeed. I've had the pleasure of hearing Rep. Capuano speak on a few issues. A real common sense, and very bright guy. Lucky to have him. Maybe if this comes up again, he and Barney can influence the state party.

wow