Pessimistic about poker

Forces have aligned against online gaming; don’t expect legalization of any kind

Julie Jacobson / AP

Casino industry representatives and exhibitors watch an online poker game during industry’s G2E conference, Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2011, in Las Vegas.

Richard N. Velotta

Richard N. Velotta

It was clear as the “fiscal cliff” deadline closed in on federal lawmakers last month that there was no way an online poker bill would reach the floor of the Senate for a vote.

It was a disappointing way to end the year for millions of poker players who believed there was a slim chance for Congress to act on legislation that most Nevadans believe is a no-brainer to legalize an activity that already occurs and could provide badly needed revenue for federal coffers.

Don’t worry, some say. The feds will act when state lawmakers take matters into their own hands and begin approving play through a patchwork of regulations from state to state.

After sitting through several sessions organized by the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States last week at the Rio, I’m not so sure even that will happen.

Because gaming is all around us in Las Vegas, it’s easy to develop a false sense of security that neighboring states understand the industry and want to see online poker play as badly as we do. Based on conversations during the three-day conference, it appears that isn’t the case.

Many believe that now that Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl has retired, Majority Leader Harry Reid needs a new Republican sidekick to push federal legislation through. If that turns out to be Sen. Dean Heller, any bill proposed immediately would be perceived as beneficial to Nevada and possibly detrimental to other states, lawmakers at the conference said.

The council opposes federal legislation. They say the Reid-Kyl bill “would create an unnecessary federal gaming licensing regime and bifurcate authority over regulation of gaming and ... put at risk critical revenues derived from state-regulated gaming.”

Directors of several state lottery organizations oppose it, too, and the governors of Idaho, Maryland, Rhode Island and Utah, along with the treasurer of Massachusetts, have written letters of opposition. (Gov. Brian Sandoval wrote a letter of support.) The lottery directors are irritated that the bill wouldn’t give them the same legislative benefits as operators of online poker.

Several Indian tribes also oppose federal and state oversight, saying their sovereign nation status would supersede regulation.

Meanwhile, the Nevada Legislature, which opens next month, will likely debate state legislation to allow the governor to negotiate compacts with other states that have legalized online poker and broaden the marketplace across state lines. That group could include New Jersey, which has a bill awaiting the signature of Gov. Chris Christie, and California, which is retooling its online poker proposals.

Passage of that legislation would almost certainly attract the attention of the federal Justice Department. Maybe that’s the strategy — a play to force the feds to move.

There’s still a strong contingent that doesn’t want Internet gambling approved. A Fairleigh Dickinson University study found that 67 percent of Americans want Internet gambling to remain illegal.

On top of that, Frank Fahrenkopf, one of the strongest lobbying voices for the gaming industry, announced this month he will step down as CEO of the American Gaming Association later this year.

It’s looking more and more like online poker proponents are going to have to fold.



Previous Discussion:

Discussion 3 comments

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. Nevada residents need not worry about Senator Heller's negative impact on proposed legislation. He proved last summer that he is unwilling to assist Senator Reid in the effort needed to get the bill(s) before the Senate.

  2. I continue to be puzzled on the thinking of people who we consider smart in the gaming industry.

    Anyone who has been following the online poker discussion knows the online poker bill had no chance of being passed, let alone brought to the floor for a full vote in the House or the Senate.

    The process of introducing online poker was flawed from the beginning. Money, as usual, made smart people act and talked like they were from another planet. Trying to tell reasonable people that cows and pigs can fly and dog and cats were one of the same.

    Online poker supporters, advocates and some politicians, were getting high on their own supply. You can say, the people who accepted money from the online poker supporters are the Karl Roves of the online poker movement. You know, making those folk believe online poker had a chance, but the numbers, the reality, told another story. A story the smart people refuse to believe, or hear for that fact.

    Bottomline, Online Poker was Dead on Arrival (DOA). Reasonable people knew this from way back. The smart people in the gaming industry weren't so dumb after all, they took money from the dreamers, while knowing the score all along.

  3. On the federal level, yes. But if NJ legalizes it, all bets are off. It's a big state with a big population and it's not just poker, it's all online games. Big difference.