The Golden State is nearing the authorization of internet poker, possibly becoming the fourth American state to achieve this. This progress follows a unanimous vote by a crucial California Assembly committee in support of legislation AB 2863.
Despite the widespread backing, certain indigenous Californian groups, such as the Pechanga and Agua Caliente tribes, have expressed firm resistance. They contend that “unfavorable entities” – businesses that persisted in operating within the US following the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, like PokerStars – ought to be barred from the regulated sector. AB 2863 does not specifically forbid these operators.
This dispute regarding “unfavorable entities” presents a substantial obstacle. In 2014, PokerStars’ parent company, Amaya, established a partnership with two tribes and three card rooms to advocate for legalization. Their objective was to introduce a collaborative online poker platform once California opened its market.
Although this recent advancement is encouraging, it’s important to acknowledge that a comparable bill in the previous year, AB 431, also overcame initial challenges but ultimately reached a standstill. The path to lawful internet poker in California continues to be intricate.
This legislation, championed by California Assembly Member Adam Gray (who also presented AB 2863), stems from a partnership with Assembly Member Reginald Jones-Sawyer, a proponent of internet poker regulation last year with AB 167. The current legislation makes notable progress by outlining specific regulatory particulars.
A crucial element of AB 2863 allocates the initial $60 million in yearly earnings to bolster California’s equine racing sector. The legislation also establishes the lawful wagering age at 21.
“Following numerous revisions and discussions with interested parties and consumer representatives, two primary concerns were voiced by dissenters: equine racing and eligibility,” remarked Gray. “Currently, we are proposing wording to tackle equine racing, and deliberations are underway concerning eligibility.”
The legislation now proceeds to the Assembly Appropriations Committee and will necessitate a supermajority vote before it can be evaluated by the Senate.