In a recent exclusive interview with PocketFives, Poker Players Alliance(PPA) Executive Director John Pappas revealed that there’s better than a 50% chance “that something could become law” regarding online poker in the United States. The organization has been ardently campaigning for Federal online poker legislation, including a bill proposed by Congressman Joe Barton (R-TX).

During a recent trip to Washington, DC, PocketFives caught up with Pappas to break down the PPA’s support of Barton’s bill, discuss its prognosis, and question whether the organization could support state-by-state licensing.

PocketFives: Give us the prospects of the Barton bill. What do you foresee happening by the middle of 2012?

John Pappas: That’s really the time horizon we’re looking at for any legislation. I think we should not just look at the Barton bill, but also any potential internet poker vehicle. The Barton bill is the most prominent bill out there right now, but there has been a lot of discussion about the Senate and what they might do. While the Barton bill is obviously the most visible bill right now, it might not end up being the end product that everything is based off of.

I think the prospect of some legislation between now and June of next year is actually pretty good. I would put it at better than a 50% chance that something could become law by then. There are some hurdles we’ll have to face, but we truly believe that if the powers that be in the Senate – i.e. Jon Kyl, Mitch McConnell, and Harry Reid – can agree on a proposal, then it being done won’t be a big problem.

What Barton has been great at doing is softening the issue in the House. I think we’re in a position now that if there were to be a vote in the House, we would win. I don’t think we’d win by a landslide, but I think we’d win by a close margin. I think that he’s done a tremendous job of bringing Republicans around to a different thinking on this. The few hearings he’s had have been helpful on that.

A lot of lawmakers, over the last few years, have been exposed to a different side of this issue. For so long, it’s been, “Gambling is bad. Internet gambling is evil.” Barton has softened up the House so that should the Senate act, the House will simply fall in line.

PocketFives: Why would brand name Republicans like Mitch McConnell and Jon Kyl(pictured) want to stand behind pro-internet gambling legislation?

John Pappas: For McConnell, it’s easy. The horse industry and he want some clarification as to the applicability of the Wire Act. They want some clarification as to the legality of taking interstate wagers. A Federal bill would help solve that. Some of the big horse tracks, namely Churchill Downs, really see an opportunity to become an internet poker provider. All of those things would lead Mitch McConnell to be supportive.

The more difficult one is Jon Kyl. Senator Kyl has no interest in making it easier for people to play poker on the internet. He actually wants to make it more difficult, perhaps, for people to play poker on the internet, but he recognizes that there is a benefit to a regulatory model that allows for licensed and regulated internet poker and truly disallows other forms of gambling.

He also sees the writing on the wall with the states. The states are all moving in this direction, whether it’s the lotteries offering it or tribes or other state gaming agencies or others in the states. He recognizes that there is going to be a patchwork of state laws instead of an overarching Federal framework that just allows poker.

He may look at this like a legacy for him. If he’s going to leave a stamp on this, he wants to be able to say that he finally enacted a policy that stamps out unregulated internet gambling in the U.S.

PocketFives: There’s been a lot of talk in DC about whether state lotteries should be able to offer online poker. Why are they not given first crack at online poker in Barton’s bill?

John Pappas: It’s not put into the bill that they can’t offer it, they’re just not one of the qualified providers. Barton’s bill would have to be clear, and the lotteries would have to be clear, that they could only offer poker.

I just don’t think the lotteries were at the table when Barton was drafting the bill. I think he’s open to the idea that if there’s a vote on this bill, there will likely be an amendment to allow lotteries to be providers. One of the sticking points will be who regulates the lottery? There has to be an independent regulator of the lottery.

I don’t think any of this is insurmountable, they’re just challenges in the road. It’s interesting because this is how the legislative process works. Having an open process allows all of the different stakeholders to come in and change the bill. Anyone who comes out and says, “I’m against the Barton bill because it doesn’t take care of me” is not really looking at the process.

PocketFives: The PPA has been largely supportive of a Federal licensing bill. When will the organization proactively support online poker bills at the state level?

John Pappas: We’re not opposed to state bills. There are some things in California that involve criminalizing players, which is a non-starter for us. There is no precedent for criminalizing individuals and essentially what you’re saying is that here’s a state-run model, take it or leave it. If you don’t like it, you’ll be in violation of the law by trying to find an alternative – that just seems silly.

We’ve really pulled off all of our lobbying efforts in the states, which have been efforts in Florida and California. Now, given April 15th, players need a place to play and they want to play in a licensed and regulated environment. And if Florida or California is able to move forward with a bill that makes sense for consumers, we’re not going to stand in the way.

At some point, we might be on the bandwagon pushing for that legislation. I do see a time where failing a Federal bill, we’re going to have to take the less desirable approach, but it’s still an approach. Perhaps the Feds will wake up once they see a number of states act. I still think there’s a lot of promise for Federal legislation between now and next year in June or July. After that, it’ll be difficult to do any legislating. Up until then, we’ll be monitoring what’s going on at the state level and supportive where we see good bills.

PocketFives: IowaState Senator Jeff Danielson (pictured) was in attendance at the conference and noted that he wasn’t too concerned about online poker liquidity in his state. Should he be?

John Pappas: As a policy-maker, here’s there to set forth good policy. I don’t think he’s coming at this from a revenue perspective. He looks at this from a consumer protection standpoint and from a freedom perspective that people should be able to play. He thinks there will be a viable marketplace there.

As a policy-maker, he’s not here to make winners or losers out of these companies. The companies are responsible for attracting and retaining players. They’re going to be challenged because of their population density, but 100 players playing on a regulated site is better than what they have today, which is zero players playing on a regulated site.

Visit ThePPA.orgfor more details.