There’s a chance that California could regulate online poker this week.

After being put on hold in June, the California legislature could act on Assemblyman Adam Gray’s online poker this week, according to several sources with knowledge of the situation.

In a recent Los Angeles Times articles, Assemblyman Adam Gray’s chief of staff Trent Hager said the bill will go to the Assembly floor on Monday. Whether or not this actually happens, and whether or not it results in debate or a vote is unclear.

The renewed interest in the bill stems from changes to the bill’s suitability language (several sources have confirmed the existence of the new suitability proposal), that the bill’s author, Assemblyman Adam Gray, hopes will mollify the coalition of tribes that stand in opposition to AB 2863.

With the legislative session coming to a close at the end of the month, and plenty of non-online poker legislation still needing to be tackled, this is likely the last attempt the legislature will make to pass an online poker bill this year.
Here’s what to watch for this week.

What happens on Monday

The first thing to keep an eye on is if AB 2863 is actually brought to the Assembly floor on Monday.

In his statement to the LA Times, Hager didn’t say he expects the bill to be brought to Assembly floor on Monday, he said the bill “will be brought up on the Assembly floor Monday,” according to the LA Times.

It would be a bad sign if Monday comes and goes without any action, and it would likely be a death blow if we’re still waiting for something to happen when next Monday rolls around.

The needle that needs to be threaded

The most important thing to keep an eye on is the new suitability language, and how the different factions react to it.

Based on several conversations I’ve had, the new, yet to be unveiled, amendment will purportedly push the suitability needle towards the Pechanga coalition. If this is the case, and if the amended suitability language tips the scales too far in Pechanga’s favor, Gray runs the risk of losing the support of PokerStars and its coalition of allies.

Essentially, if Pechanga and its affiliated tribes come on board and PokerStars and its allies reject the new proposal, Gray is simply replacing one opposition group with another. The only way this wouldn’t be the case is if members of the PokerStars coalition peeled off, which seems unlikely considering there have been very few cracks in the coalition up to this point, with the only cause for concern coming from the San Manuel tribe in the wake of former Amaya CEO David Baazov being charged with insider trading.

Furthermore, Pechanga and its allies getting their way on suitability language doesn’t necessarily mean they’re on board with the bill, which makes it even less likely the PokerStars coalition would splinter.

Support, or something short of support?

On this same line, another thing to watch for is whether Pechanga and its allies support the bill, or if they merely drop their opposition and revert to their previous neutral position.

It should also be noted that “support” is a relative word in California politics. Over the past several years different tribes and card rooms have supported different online poker bills without actually signing off on the bill. For some stakeholders, support is for the direction the bill is moving; it doesn’t mean they support it as a finished product.

Beyond suitability

Finally, keep an eye on what non-suitability concerns are raised.

A number of tribes still seem concerned over the taxation rate and licensing fees, not to mention the size of the subsidy that has been earmarked for the horseracing industry.

The suitability language is certainly the most difficult needle to thread, but it’s not the only remaining obstacle. As an analogy, plenty of people have survived Heartbreak Hill, arguably the hardest stretch of the Boston Marathon that runners face 20 miles into the race, but failed to cross the finish line.

A number of unanswered questions

The overarching question is, will the new amendment result in Adam Gray’s online poker bill passing the California Assembly, or is it merely California’s yearly ritual of raising the hopes of the poker community before pulling the rug out from underneath them?

On a micro level, there are even more questions:

  • What does the new suitability language say, and is it really a compromise both sides can live with?
  • If it’s not amenable to certain key stakeholders, do the current coalitions emerge intact, or will there be movement?
  • Is the suitability language a fully cooked compromise, or like many other aspects of the bill, just an agreeable starting point for further discussions?
  • And if the bill passes the Assembly, what happens in the Senate?

Hopefully, some of the questions will be answered this week.