California gamers who have been waiting several weeks for the much-anticipated online poker debut of PrivateTable.com are still waiting.
The launch of the real-money online casino, which was announced several weeks ago by the Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel has been delayed several times. According to the tribe, “We are making the final preparations. We are still double and triple checking everything and until that is all done we are not setting a date.”
There is some speculation that the tribe is making sure that it can legally move forward with something that the state legislature has not yet legalized. The tribe has maintained that it is allowed to operate online gaming as a Class II game, and thus does not require a gaming compact with the state.
Dave Vialpando, chairman of the tribe’s gaming commission, “Our authority to offer class II gaming from our reservation is not prohibited by any statute.” He added, “In fact, we believe it is covered by IGRA. We have been fully cooperative with all the government agencies that have asked us questions, in fact with anyone who has asked us questions.”
The multiple delays and deadlines that have come and gone without action have also generated some snarky comments from online commentators, such as this by Steve Ruddock of California Gambler, “After their latest ‘launch date’ has once again come and gone, can we all finally agree that the Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel tribe has no intention of actually launching an online poker site in California?”
The Santa Ysabel tribe previously operated a small casino in the San Diego backcountry but was forced to shut it down after an unsuccessful attempt to separate the casino from the tribe and declare bankruptcy.
Ruddock and other critics point out that if the Santa Ysabel tribe is successful in its endeavor that suddenly there will be no real regulation of online gaming in the U.S. As Ruddick put it, “All of the safeguards and regulations that have been put in place in Nevada, Delaware, and New Jersey would be useless, as every tribe in the country would suddenly be leasing their name to online poker sites across the globe to come setup shop on their reservation and none of these operators would be restricted by these strict regulations and tax burdens.”
State lawmakers have been jawboning online poker for several years now. The most recent attempt died in both houses shortly before the legislature year session ended. Assemblyman Reginald Jones-Sawyer has announced plans to introduce new legislation in December for the 2015 session.
One sticking point to any poker deal is the “bad actor” clause that has been included in both previous bills. The clause was very obviously aimed at PokerStars, the partner of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, one of the largest gaming tribes in the state. The two, along with two of the largest card rooms, the Bike and Commerce, hope to operate a poker site.
Jones-Sawyer has hinted that the clause might be reworded or even taken out. “We must make sure that any ‘Bad Actor Language’ is written so that it is applied fairly, and avoids any possible future legal challenges,” he was quoted last week by OnlinePoker.net.He added, “It is my hope that during the next few months we can continue the dialogue with all the interested principals so that there is a clear consensus and mutual agreement as to who will be able to participate in providing internet poker to our citizens.”
The lawmaker is also waiting to get some legal opinions from the U.S. Justice Department and the California Gaming Commission. “One of the major reasons that I did not move AB 2291 this legislative session was that the Department of Justice and the California Gaming Commission did not have enough time to review the language and make relevant recommendations on the regulatory structure of the bill,” he said in a statement.
I. Nelson Rose, a California-based expert on gaming law, believes that 2015 may be the year that online poker is legalized. He told Card Player last week, “The problem is purely political,” he explained. “California has politically powerful gaming tribes and card clubs, who have nothing against internet poker, as long as they are the ones to run it.” He concluded, “Once a political solution is worked out, and it is not an election year, the legislature will approve Internet poker for California.”
The Morongo tribe has hinted that it may challenge any law containing a “bad actor” clause based on the U.S. Constitution’s ban on bills of attainder, i.e. laws aimed at individuals.
PokerStars, which EGaming Review contacted recently, doesn’t buy the notion that its participation is the sticking point in acceptable legislation. According to PokerStars’ Director of Group Strategy and Business Development Guy Templer, “No, PokerStars was not responsible for the collapse of online poker legislation in California. There were many factors at play. Although consensus towards internet poker was at its strongest in the last few years, it was still not universal.” Templar argues that a bill will be passed when all interests are brought into the fold.
Currently Nevada, New Jersey and Delaware allow online gaming.
