The Californian Assembly Governmental Organization Committee voted unanimously on Wednesday to pass a bill that could see the legalization and regulation of online poker in the Golden State.
AB 2863, as the bill is known, passed 19-0 in the committee chaired by Assemblyman Adam Gray, who is also responsible for introducing the bill.
Speaking after the successful vote, Adam Gray said in a press release: “The question of how to regulate iPoker has been in front of the Legislature for nearly a decade. We have not rushed this process. We have taken the time necessary to thoroughly understand and respond to the concerns put forth by stakeholders. Through this process, we have created a coalition that is willing to acknowledge the problem and support a comprehensive solution.”
Certain issues which prevented previous bills from progressing any further in the legal channels were at least addressed by the new bill, namely traditionally strong objection by the state’s horse racing industry, as well as the question of a ‘bad actor’ clause.
The issue of the horse racing industry has been solved by a guarantee to the industry that it will be paid $60 million each year in return for support of the online poker bill.
The second issue – that of PokerStars’ entry into California’s online poker industry – promises to be a harder nut to crack. It has been suggested in various media pieces that while AB 2863 managed to pass successfully through its first committee vote, traditional opponents of PokerStars only supported the bill in order to move it to a forum where Gray’s position holds less sway.
It is believed that once the bill reaches the California State Assembly, these hardliners will re-open the bad actor clause debate once more and use it as a platform to attack PokerStars – again. These factions believe that they have a greater chance of receiving an online poker bill that bans PokerStars if they take the vote out of Gray’s home court.
OPR’s Dave Palmero quoted Pechanga tribe lobbyist, David Quintana as saying that his coalition would allow AB 2863 to move forward “for the sake of permitting good faith discussions”.
“But,” he continued, “we just want to make it clear that unless the ‘bad actor’ issue is cleared up, we will oppose this bill – with all hell and fury – if it’s not fixed by the time it gets to the Assembly floor.”
