The move in the halls of Congress for the federal regulation of online poker has its opponents. Indian gaming officials aren’t happy with it, as are individual Senators and Representatives on both sides of the aisle for a variety of reasons. According to a report from Washington, D. C., there’s new opposition that could be facing the proposal for regulation if it comes to a vote before the end of the current Congress.
According to Kevin Bogardus on TheHill.com, the push by Nevada Senator Harry Reid to pass his compromise bill (co-authored with retiring Arizona Senator Jon Kyl) is facing stiff challenges from the individual state legislatures and their governors. Following the move in December 2011 by the U. S. Department of Justice that stated the Wire Act of 1961 applied only to sports betting, several states read this as indicating that they were free to be able to open up their own online gaming outlets, mostly focused on lottery ticket sales. The Reid/Kyl proposal, according to Bogardus, is upsetting state governments because of its pre-emptive strike on the individual states’ movement towards legalization of that and other forms of online gaming.
The proposed Reid/Kyl bill, which would open a regulated poker market in the United States, has provisions in it that would essentially shut down any other form of gaming in the country. If the Reid/Kyl bill is passed (as well as the bill from Texas Representative Joe Barton on the subject in the House), it is consolidated with the House bill and signed into law, it would place restrictions on what the states could do with online gaming. Under the Reid/Kyl proposed bill, online gaming – whether intra- or inter-state – would be prohibited except for horse racing and online poker, both of which would have federal regulations to cover their activities.
These two points are what seems to have raised the ire of the different state legislatures, governors and lobbyists for some forms of online gaming. Bogardus quotes Margaret DeFrancisco, the co-chairwoman of the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries (NASPL), as saying, “It’s (lottery ticket sales) all the money that the states absolutely rely on. (Online) is another sales channel. We don’t want to be restricted by the federal government telling us what gaming policy should be in the States.”
The discussion of the impact on the states comes as the head of the American Gaming Association, Frank Fahrenkopf, spoke at the Global Gaming Expo going on at the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas. Speaking to the gathering yesterday, Fahrenkopf stated that passage of any regulation of online poker during the post-election “lame duck” session will “take a bit of gambler’s luck.” Although the AGA is behind federal regulation of online poker, Fahrenkopf also expressed that he wasn’t happy with the current version.
“The legislation (when put before Congress after the elections) may be much different that the summary we saw recently,” Fahrenkopf stated as he expressed his thoughts that the “lame duck” session doesn’t ensure that an online poker measure will be passed. Fahrenkopf pointed out that there are many issues that the Congress will face before it is adjourned and that online poker would be “difficult” to make it into the discussion.
Fahrenkopf also pointed out that it may be “now or never” for passage of federal regulation of the online poker industry. He pointed out to the conference that, with the end of the current Congress in January 2013, there are several proponents of online poker that will be retiring from Congress or may be voted out. “We don’t know what the landscape will be like come January,” Fahrenkopf stated. “It could be much more difficult if we don’t get something done during the “lame duck” session of Congress.”
Amidst the infighting in Congress and the displeasure of the individual states and Indian tribes (among other issues), it is looking as if the battle for online poker regulation is an uphill one rather than the “slam dunk” that most have viewed it to be.
