California Lawmakers to Look at Online Poker Again

California legislators are expected once again to try to pass some sort of bill that would legalize online poker. This will be the tenth year they have tried, but many of the obstacles that have stopped it in the past remain unresolved. Assemblyman Adam Gray (l.) led the effort last year, and is likely to take the point again.

For the 10th year California lawmakers will be proposing new bills to legalize online poker. However, many of the thorny issues that have stopped previous proposals in the their paths remain.

So far, no one knows who will be the first to introduce a bill. Last session bills were proposed by Assemblyman Mike Gatto, Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer and, most significantly, Adam Gray, chairman of the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee.

Gray’s bill survived the longest, and he is most likely to introduce such a bill in 2017. He has been the main driver of such legislation for the past few years. He continues to chair the GO Committee, however he is viewed with some suspicion because he changed sides in the middle of the discussions earlier this year.

He shifted from the PokerStars Coalition to the group arrayed with Pechanga, and in the eyes of many did it because his father-in-law, an influential lobbyist, began representing Pechanga.

The first thing to be determined will be if the progress that has been achieved so far remains, or if the bill’s sponsor must begin from square one. For example, it is no longer a given that tribes will acquiesce in a proposal that would pay horseracing interests around $60 million annually to agree to not participate in online gaming.

The horseracing lobby itself may want to try for a bigger share of the pie. If that issue is put to rest early, the main sticking point from last year will remain: suitability, or the issue of whether PokerStars can be locked out from participating by a “bad actor” requirement that would hold it to account for past behavior when it ran afoul of the U.S. Justice Department over allowing Americans to play on its offshore websites in violation of U.S. law.

The two coalitions last year each took a turn at trying to pass competing bills. Neither had the political clout to overcome the other because the California constitution requires that financially related bills must have a two-thirds approval in both legislative chambers.

Unless that issue is resolved, 2017 could see about as little action in online poker as 2016 did.