So what?

The argument that the government should/will legalize/regulate i-poker because it is a gigantic source of revenue to them is getting really old. Let's face it - the argument has been made for years, and no legislation has been passed. And in the best case, the revenue generated by i-poker would be nothing compared to lotteries.

CA has a problem: how to appease the commercial and tribal gaming facilities and at the same time not shut out the horse racing industry altogether. All of these groups have enough hooks into the government to kill a bill that they perceive as unfair. COPA wants amendments as well (read here).

When they work out a compromise, then you get a law. Economics/Politics 101.

Is there a reason other than to generate revenue that would make a state government regulate online gaming?

I doubt there will ever be a bill that all interests involved will agree on. I also think you are a little rusty on economics/politics 101. The big guy usually beats the crap out of the little guy.

The little guy isn't so little here. COPA is a coalition that includes not only the majority of the tribes, but the Commerce & Bicycle Clubs, et al. They are "bigger" than the HR interests.

As for your first question, you twisted my words. But I will get to the point: there ARE reasons for state government NOT to regulate online gaming DESPITE the revenue they could potentially generate.

In reference to politics and/or economics 101; years is the "short run" unfortunately. My opinion is the first state getting going in internet gambling will be the biggest hurdle. After that other states will have a benchmark and real evidence of what and what will not happen if you legalize certain types of internet gaming.

Big guy: State interests
Little guy(s): Gaming interest

California is in a very bad spot right now. There is going to be a referendum for tax increases on everyone. If those increases don't happen, then there will most likely be automatic cuts. When those automatic cuts start taking place, the bottom line is going to be the only thing that matters. If the tax increases are approved, California will still be facing the same cuts, because the tax increases won't even cut the deficit in half.

This is why I think that if state lawmakers decide that IGaming is on the table, they aren't waiting on anyone.

Do not believe everything you see reported in the WSJ. I am not a subcriber, and could not see the article, but there are at least two State lotteries I know are talking about poker.

Which ones?

Many WSJ articles are fully available if you access them via google:

States Up the Online Ante [google link]

Thanks to sba for the Google work-around to the article. However, having read it, I must have missed where there was any conclusion that no lotteries are talking poker ....

As a matter of fact, both the lotteries chiefly discussed in the article, Illinois and Delaware are discussing poker. (Delaware's lottery is already invested in the B&M casino business.)

(Over all the WSJ article was excellent background reporting on the quotes from the lotteries. The salient point being not that the article focussed on adding p[oker or casino games, but rather the stakeholders in off-line sales having concerns about online sales coming at their expense. Different focus from whether or not lotteries will seek to enter online gaming.)

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...2MDaxydYDt45Mg

I assume you know this (the bolded) from other sources? The article certainly doesn't say that they are discussing poker. I guess what I meant in my synopsis is that no lotteries are publicly talking about online poker. Maybe some are considering it, but none have publicly mentioned plans to pursue it afaik.

There was nothing in the WSJ article on the topic, tacking a wishful statement on to a synopsis, i.e. that no lotteries are discussing offering poker online, made little sense.

My statements about Delaware and Illinois are based upon public statements, the fact that the Illinois Lottery Director is the keynote speaker at the iGamingSuperShow in Dublin next week, and, in Delaware's case, the proposal of specific legislation for online gaming.

"When you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras."

Glad to hear some of the lotteries are pursuing online poker. Do you know if they are actually putting any emphasis on inter-state player pools for poker, or is the poker just an ancillary part of authorizing a suite of intra-state online gambling games?

Illinois Looking at Online Poker Through Lottery
Lawmaker Introduces Proposal for State-Run System

tamiller's post shows the now-public face of the horses running in Illinois.

Thanks.

Thanks for the update.

Good stuff, everyone. Thanks for all of the info.

Has the PPA done any work with IL legislators? Have any views on the IL situation. This cant be allowed to happen. IL Lottery run poker would be a disaster imo.

Cullerton wrote in the letter: “The state could organize the first major poker pool, garner worldwide popularity, and position itself as a ‘hub’ for multi-state and international iGaming.”

multi-state? disaster averted.


cause it's like, people just stop playing the lotto after they have 20 or 30 years of -98% ROI, right? no! they don't even quit THEN!!!


somebody needs to make a 'rake me' parody, cause i'm practically begging for it.

Trust its not the lack of fish that worries me. The state runs the lottery thru a 3rd party. They have zero poker experience. The record is corruption and high rake.

You will forgive me if i have zero confidence in the state putting together a system with the players best interests in mind....which is why i wanna know if the PPA has spoken to anyone.

cue (sound of crickets ) ........

.... he has been in this thread, which is good because the PPA forum on 2+2 has had zero posts since the Great Return.

Started an Illinois thread. It would be better to move the discussion there. Also update for OP:

IL

It was one whole hour from the time of the initial post to your comment. Is it your expectation that PPA have 24/7 real-time monitoring of every thread on every poker forum?

That's because most of the posts are here in PL, as you know.