Just a quick hit, and nothing that if you’re reading this blog you probably don’t know already.  (But please keep reading…)  ABC News has picked up on the Wall Street Journal’s article on Sen. Reid’s attempt to legalize poker.  Some pretty amusing comments are made by Senators about what it is like to support the casinos.  Also, a claim that the monetary pie at stake is $25 BILLION.  That’s got to make even the most Republican Senator take notice, no?  Anyway, I love it when the “mainstream” media gets involved.  There’s no such thing as bade P.R.  So check the article out here.

Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is offering legislation would legalize online poker, but allow only certain current brick-and-mortar establishments to host the sites for the first two years.  Regulation would be done by current agencies, such as the Nevada Gaming Commission, and not by the federal government.  Two predictable things have occurred so far:  (1) the legislation is supported by major Nevada casinos (who, ahem, donated significantly to Senator Reid’s hotly contested recent re-election campaign), and (2) Republican legislators, led by Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), oppose the bill — they claim that important legislation that affects “the young, the weak, and the vulnerable in the name of new revenues to cover more government spending” should not be passed during the lame duck session of Congress. 

Normally I’m against cramming legislation in to beat a deadline and in a manner that prays on weakness.  But given how the UIGEA was passed, turnabout seems like fair play.  Still, I do have serious concerns that prevent me from automatically supporting the legislation.  They center around who supports this bill.  Internet poker should be legal.  But to do it as a means to expand brick-and-mortar casino profits, and not as part of an overarching national framework, seems short-sighted and ultimately counter-productive to the game’s acceptance.  The UIGEA should be repealed.  But it should not be supplanted by a special interest bill designed for corporate gain.   Two wrongs do not make a right.

Not too long ago California had been considering intrastate online poker.  That possibility deteriorated as a result of in-state fighting among tribes and other constituents.  Basically, over money.  But hot on the heels of New Jersey becoming (well, just about) the first state to permit intrastate online poker, California is witnessing a renewed effort to pass legislation of its own.   The next big step is to find a bill sponsor as the most recent sponsor is in legal trouble (politicians!).  It’s interesting that two of the states with the largest brick-and-mortar poker strongholds are the ones leading the online charge.  Synergy, as my college professor (of The Office) may say.  Whatever.  As long as there’s legal poker we’re there.