One the biggest reasons online poker bills have never gotten anywhere in the California legislature is the in-fighting amongst stakeholders, in particular the many Native American tribes that operate casinos around the state. California is so big, though, and there are so many groups that want to be sure their needs are met that these sorts of problems should not be unexpected.
The latest grumbling comes from the California Tribal Business Alliance (CTBA), an organization whose goal is to “enhance the success of the business enterprises of our tribal government members.” Recently, there have been reports that PokerStars and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians have been working together to oppose any sort of “bad actor” clause in potential online poker legislation in the state. The news, originally tweeted by iGamingPlayer, was complemented by a report from Gambling Compliance which said the two entities were also working with two California card rooms.
A “bad actor” clause is the portion of a bill which prohibits certain operators from obtaining a license because of something they did before poker was/will be regulated in the state. Typically, this refers to a potential licensee continuing to operate in the U.S. after the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA) was passed. Many poker rooms and network shut their doors to U.S. customers after the UIGEA, but some carried on, most notably PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker (not coincidentally, these three were also named in the Black Friday indictments).
So obviously, PokerStars does not want a “bad actor” clause included in any legislation. Nor does, apparently, the Morongo Band and a couple card rooms, presumably because they want to partner with PokerStars if and when online poker gets up and running in California.
The CTBA, however, does not see things the same way. On Friday, the group, which is comprised of the Pala Band of Luiseño Indians, the Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians of California, and the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians, released a statement penned by its Chairperson, Leslie Lohse. The statement briefly summarized PokerStars’ history in the U.S., including its $731 million post-Black Friday settlement with the Department of Justice. In her conclusion, Lohse got to the main point:
In light of the partnership negotiations among PokerStars, Morongo, and the three card clubs, the Member Tribes of CTBA will continue to work diligently to ensure any online poker authorization bill will impose strong controls, mandate disclosures, and promote the highest standards of integrity in the gaming industry. Therefore we will strongly oppose any legislation which allows PokerStars to participate.
Two online poker bills were introduced into the California legislature in February. One was Assembly Bill 229, written by California Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer. It is backed by several tribes, including the the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians and the Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians of California. It is a very protectionist bill, which not only restricts the online poker market to the borders of California, but also does not allow for interstate online poker compacts and would also require the state to opt-out of federal legislation. It does intentionally leave out a “bad actor” clause in an effort to get all tribes on the same page.
The other bill is Senate Bill 1366, introduced by State Senator Lou Correa. It is more or less a typical poker bill, requiring all the various protections we have come to expect. It does allow for interstate poker compacts.
If pokerstars isn’t allowed in…then what’s the point? It’s the only site i want to play on.