By Shari Geller
While the consensus in the poker community is that online poker is more likely to be first legalized on a state-by-state basis, and not federally, the U.S. Senate again held hearings on the topic, reviving the hope that some federal legislation could be in the offing.
The hearing before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs was the second time the issue of legalizing online poker was raised before this committee, but the first hearing to be held following the U. S. Department of Justice's about-face on the Wire Act. Late last year, the DOJ released an opinion that the Wire Act only applied to sports betting and not other forms of gambling. The question at the hearing was what this all means for Indian tribes who might want to offer online poker.
Speaking on behalf of the tribes was Robert Odawi Porter, president of the Seneca Nation of Indians. Porter said that the question of interest to those he represents was "Will the decisions of Congress on Internet gaming support or destroy Indian gaming jobs held by our tribal citizens and our neighbors and will your decisions support or erode our gaming revenue that tribal nations use to fund essential government programs and services?"
Porter also raised concern that Indian tribes would be excluded from any national Internet gaming legislation by casino-based interests in Nevada and New Jersey who are looking for a monopoly. "This brazen power grab is based on a lie, a fiction, that big-Nevada and New Jersey interests alone are sophisticated enough and strong enough to operate Internet gaming businesses," Porter said. "They are determined to shove Indian gaming away from the table."
Also speaking at the hearing were academics with expertise in gaming law including I. Nelson Rose, professor at Whittier Law School, as well as gaming lawyers such as Patrick Fleming, of the Poker Players Alliance, who argued about the economic benefits of online gaming to the Indian casinos saying "It presents not a threat, in my opinion, but an opportunity. They can use Internet poker to help bring people into their land-based casinos and support their operations."
Rose echoed the general consensus that if the federal government fails to act quickly, the states may move in first. This could harm some smaller tribes who might not be able to compete for a limited number of state-issued licenses. Federal legislation, by contrast, could be set up to protect the interests of all tribes.
By the end of the eighty minute hearing, it seemed generally agreed that federal legislation legalizing and regulating online poker would be the best way to protect the interest of the Indian tribes and allow them to participate on an equal footing with other casino interests.
»
