weekly-shuffle

Past Articles:

Thoughts on PokerStars VIP Changes
2015-12-20

The Top 9 Myths About Online Poker
2015-05-17

The 4 Worst Tips Given To Beginner Poker Players (Don't Fall Into These Traps)
2015-05-03

Should You Play Poker Professionally?
2015-04-05

Poker Can Change Your Life: 4 Inspirational Rags to Riches Stories
2015-03-29

The Discomfort Zone: Manage it for Growth and Success
2015-03-15

An Intro to Daily Fantasy Soorts
2015-03-08

The 4 Main Psychological Principles That Shape Your Poker Play
2015-02-15

A Detailed Rake and Reward Comparison of Three of the Top Poker Sites
2015-02-08

Don't Jump The Gun: Get Full Value From Your Best Hands
2015-02-01

The Weekly Shuffle Archives, 2005-2017


In other languages:



New Jersey Bill Defeated: A Setback for Poker

THE WEEKLY SHUFFLE, 2011-03-06, by TwoGun

This past week, Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, vetoed a bill that would allow for in-state online poker. The bill resoundingly passed the New Jersey Congress by wide margins (margins so wide it could override a veto if voted upon again).

New Jersey passing this law would have likely caused other states to do the same. State governments are like dogs; when one starts barking, the others think 'oh, there must be something to bark about' so they bark too. Sometimes it is stupid stuff like the Arizona immigration law. There are now copycat laws proposed in over two dozen states mimicking the Arizona law. In poker's case, if New Jersey passed intra-state online poker, others would think 'oh, this is a good idea to close the budget gap' and would pass one too. It would not be as good as Harry Reid's bill passing at the Federal level, but it's something.

online poker 468x60


Christie vetoing the law is a huge setback in this regard. At first glance, my instinct was that Christie was more in the pockets of social conservatives than I thought. Though, when giving reasons for his veto, he didn't cite general anti-gambling gibberish. In New Jersey, gambling is currently only allowed in Atlantic City. There have been laws/public measures voted down that would expand gambling through the entire state. The law, as written, would claim all bets 'originated' in Atlantic City, but it's pretty easy to understand the point that the bets 'originate' throughout the state with this bill. This was the crux of the reason behind Christie's veto, and quite frankly, it's not without merit. Christie also was against that the revenues went to help the ailing horse racing industry, which is a fair point. Why should online poker tax revenues go to horse racing companies?

Proponents of the bill have said they will try to fix the bill and get it passed again. If need be, put it to the voters and let them decide. Christie is open to that, and it seems a fair and unambiguous way to allow gambling to expand out of Atlantic City in just electronic poker form.

I've always thought the best state to initiate this sort of bill is California. Poker is legal throughout the state there, so there is no 'expanding gambling outside of a certain area' issue with a bill. They also have a pressing need for more tax revenues. California is also the largest state in the union (population wise), so this would bring online poker to a lot of Americans quickly. The governor is also a Democrat, and while I'm no Jerry Brown fan, we don't have to worry he suddenly needs Sarah Palin's endorsement to run against Obama in the 2012 election.

The Weekly Shuffle is our Sunday column with our observations and commentary on the poker world. Have an idea for an article? Leave a suggestion on the feedback page.

 


Free Money Offers
$88
Create an account and get up to $88 no deposit required, use our link.


PokerTips Newsletter Sign-Up