Back in the early 2000s, we thought we were seeing an online poker war unfold. The battle for supremacy between PokerStars and the old Full Tilt Poker (and, to a lesser extent, UB.com and Absolute Poker), with their litanies of pros issuing their Sirens’ song to eager players to “come to their site” was entertaining but, in essence, wasn’t a real battle. PokerStars had (and still does) a predominant edge in several factors of operation that kept them as the leader of the pack. What is going on now, however, makes the “wars” of that bygone era (can you say “bygone” if it was less than ten years ago?) seem like a sorority pillow fight.
Yes, the REAL online poker war has now begun.
It started off calmly in 2006 with the sneaky passage of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which sat silently on the sidelines as first the Bush Administration and then the Obama Administration gathered enough information to actually put it to use. That came to the front when the Department of Justice hammered out the “Black Friday” indictments of April 2011, which escalated the war even more as the “Big Three” (PokerStars, FTP and CEREUS) were either crippled to the point of extinction or sent packing from the United States.
There was a lull again in the true online poker war until December 2011, when the DoJ stunningly announced that the Wire Act of 1961, long used as the tool to prevent online gaming and poker, only applied to sports betting and that other forms of gaming were allowable. That brought the rush of offense from online poker supporters in the three states – Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey – that entered into the intrastate online gaming scene in 2013.
Now, however, are the times that try men’s (and women’s) souls in the continuing battle regarding online gaming and poker. It puts the proverbial question of civilized society to the fore: does the populace determine what is best, or does “money talk and BS walk?”
The Sides Are Being Set
On the anti-gaming front, at least four state governors – Rick Perry of Texas, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Nikki Haley of South Carolina and Rick Scott of Florida – have publicly come out in support of the reinstitution of the Wire Act’s prior stance regarding online gaming and poker. It is problematic that two of those states are in the Top Five of most populous states in the U. S. and that two of them also are prominent gaming destinations. It is also important to indicate that all four of these governors are members of the Republican Party.
Then there’s the efforts of Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire chairman of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation who has mounted the stiffest challenge against regulated online gaming and poker since Bill Frist’s ill-fated passage of the UIGEA (it ended up getting Frist tossed out of office in his home state of Tennessee). Through his shadow “lobbying” group, the Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling, Adelson has stated he will spend “whatever it takes” to see that online gaming and poker’s expansion across the U. S. is stopped.
While these factions don’t have the numbers, they have the money, thanks to Adelson.
On the pro-gaming side, the numbers are there. Pretty much every other casino outlet in the U. S. (save for Steve Wynn, who seems to be playing both sides of the equation), under the auspices of the American Gaming Association, is in favor of federal regulation of the industry, be it full casino gaming or just online poker. The organization that they have created to counter Adelson’s CSIG, the Coalition for Consumer and Online Protection, has yet to seriously mount any challenge to the Adelson-led charge, however. The Democratic Governors Association has also come out in supporting a state-by-state solution to online gaming and poker regulation.
One of the longest tenured fighters for poker has been the Poker Players Alliance. Since 2005, the PPA has been at the forefront of poker’s battles in legislatures and the halls of Congress. With its million-plus membership, the PPA has the ear of the populace but, with its lack of funding, can’t grab the ear of politicians. In 2012, the PPA received $5 million in contributions and membership dues; that $5 million doesn’t go very far in state legislatures and Congress, especially when compared to Adelson’s riches.
How Will The War End?
It is going to be a long and costly battle for both sides. Although the anti-online gaming forces have the ammunition, the pro-gaming forces have the numbers to make a difference. Over the course of the next two election cycles – the 2014 midterm elections and the 2016 Presidential election – poker players may be the decisive end of the battles.
Through analysis of the candidates who inhabit their state legislatures and Congress, poker players are the ones who will determine who decides what direction the war will take. There’s only one problem with that, however. Poker players are a diverse lot…some are heavily into the political process, some could care less. Some may approve of elected officials that have an anti-gaming and poker stance because of their other positions and, finally, some may not consider online gaming or poker to be that “important” of an issue to take a stand.
Despite Adelson’s bankroll, it will be up to the poker players themselves to make the decision on the direction of regulation of the industry. Whether they take on that challenge or not will be the ultimate factor in which side will be the winner.