is there any news on why its later this year and not ASAP? running out the clock was the death of it last year amirite?

This clock runs out in January 2013. No clock in January 2012.

In this case, "later" does not mean October. Rather, it seems it means anytime after than OP's post.

I expect this to get introduced sooner than later (but I don't know the exact date).

oh of course, silly me

strange wording then...

I don't get this. How exactly does one draw the line on how long is needed for the "playing field to be level"?

We could wait 5 years and the playing field wouldn't be level. Aren't all the major players set up to immediately offer online poker already and just chomping at the bit? Wasn't FT and PS on the verge of IPOing? Surely one or both of those sites will be merged or acquired by an American interest powerful enough to do so?

The "blackout" period in the Reid bill of 15 months will look real sweet compared to any "transition" period in a Frank type of bill.

Got an email from the PPA saying the bill would be introduced in the next couple of weeks.

I got the same email and looked here to see if I could figure out what it meant. What happens in January 2013 besides the start of a new presidential term?

Ditto with a reminder to renew my PPA membership.

A new congress is seated.

I'm cautiously excited to hear what's in this bill. I guess I can wait two weeks.

Umm care to elaborate? You're saying its gonna be much longer? Guess ir fact?

We'll have to wait and see if this bill is similar to the last frank bill before we know any details.

No one knew how long the transition period would have been in the last Frank bill, the time table wasn't spelled out. But it certainly would have been at least as long as the Reid bill but likely(good guess) much longer.

Unlike the Reid versions which would allow certain established state gaming authorities (NJ/NJ?) to set up regs and issue licenses everything under the last frank bill would have to be done on the federal level.

After the passing of a Frank type bill (if language is unchanged) any sites wanting a chance to apply fro a license would have to stop serving the US. Before any licenses could be issued and play begin the US Treasury depart would have to: The US Treasury would have to set up a gaming department or division and hire all necessary personal. Draft,finalize and approve of all regulations concerning online gaming. Approve all licenses, set up procedures for and approve (test) all software,RNG's, make sure all sites comply with regulation,and whatnot. And whatever else is involved in setting up all the detailed regs and procedures in getting this going.

This will take time, it wont happen in just a few months. This would all be new for the federal gov, they don't have a federal gaming commission, it will take time and expect delays. It isn't going to happen any faster then the Reid 15months,IMO and I would guess at least 2 years and maybe longer.

Edit: It's one of the reasons I thought the 15months in the Reid bill wasn't too bad, compared to the Frank Bill or likely most legislation that may pass in Congress 15 months was a "better" deal

But let's not forget about the Menendez bill in the Senate. It had a transition period during which existing sites could continue to operate. Not that this would necessarily make it into a final bill, but I just want to point out that regardless of what the Frank bill said last year and what this year's bill says when introduced, a final bill will likely be some hybrid of the Frank bill, the Menendez bill, the Reid bill and whatever else the lobbyists, legislators and vested interests can stick in there per their agendas.

I never expected the Frank bill, if advanced through a vote and to the Senate, to be the Frank bill by the time it got through. All we can do is continue to push for player-friendly provisions throughout the process, and either support or oppose the final bill when it arrives at a final vote based on the final language.

PokerXanadu - do you guys have any more details at this stage aside from the proposed (ballpark) introduction date? Or is it essentially a case of waiting a couple of weeks for it all to come to light?

I don't have any details at all.

Ok thanks

There is a problem with this approach though, and it was revealed last year in the Reid negotiations. By the time the final vote comes up the PPA's opinion is irrelevant. So whether we would support or oppose a final bill is completely doesnt matter.

I'm not sure there is a better alternative to approach this, but we should be clear what we will do when the final vote comes is very unlikely to matter.

Well to be honest we just aren't some huge powerful group that is ever going to have a lot of sway. Our power is that we do get to vote and even though we aren't millions upon millions strong that's still something. We also have knowledge of the industry. If we can explain why some decision will hurt the industry and therefore hurt tax revenue then we might be able to make an impact. All we can hope to do is make our voices heard. I don't know what else we can reasonably shoot for.

I dont disagree, I just remember a lot of talk last session about how we should support a bill because we could always block it at the end if we hated it. That's not really going to happen. I think we're still better off engaging, but players should be aware there is some risk.

CNN article
If only there were some new source of revenue.

Look at his website and wiki. http://campbell.house.gov/index.php?...1036&Itemid=37

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._T._Campbell_III

He is also on the Financial Services and Budget Committees in the House, which are prime assignments.

I just hope this includes no blackout and isnt taxed super high. I wanna play with the guys in germany who pay my bills not with marylanders or americans only.

at the rate maryland is getting its casinos up and running, i doubt they'll have ipoker by the end of the decade.

We don't know what this "new" bill will look like and if it will just be the same old Frank bill or something new. We really have to wait till the proposal is released before we know anything, but

Sure these Bills will change as the move along in congress, they may even continue to change right up until the last min before a finial vote. Some changes will be good for us and some bad. We don't know what changes will be made and can't count on getting specific language added or removed. We can only know what the current language is in a bill, that current wording is what we need to go on.

Much like state opt-outs I think we have to accept some kind of transition period in any federal bill, we just have to suck it up and go with it. The problem is that many players found the 15 month blackout period in the Reid bill unacceptable but many of these same players thought the Frank Bill was a better option, yet under the frank bill this "transition period" (which would have the same effect on players as a blackout) was likely much longer then 15 months.

All I'm saying is just like with state opt-outs, players should be made aware of any transition/blackout/freeze out or w/e it may be called if they are in a proposed bill. If this new bill is like the old frank bill and the PPA rallies support for it, and every comes in with "sent" and "one time" only to find out later that there is this long transition period 9as long or longer the Reid bill) then many will be pissed. We'll see the "WTF PPA" and the "I would have never sent a letter to may lawmaker if I knew" and what not.

In any bil the PPA will need to better communicate the potential bad as well as the good in bills then let the players decide if they can support it,which I think we should.