Sc’s Senator Lindsey Graham is one of the most prominent ‚jokers‘ on the PPA’s target list of anti-online gambling proponents.
The Poker Players Alliance (PPA) has generated a list of 22 politicians that the organization is referring to as ‚jokers,‘ highlighting lawmakers who are up for election in and who also oppose Internet poker november. The people on record include candidates for the Senate, House of Representatives and gubernatorial positions, and feature both Republicans and Democrats who have opposed online gambling.
‚Over the year that is past these ‚jokers‘ have advocated for federal and/or state prohibitions for Internet poker. Some have actually even sought to criminalize those who perform,‘ the PPA’s declaration states. ‚We hope you will need the time to make contact with these lawmakers before Election Day and let your voice be heard. It’s time to take the ‚jokers‘ out of the deck!‘
Most on List Are Likely to Win Elections
Most targets are expected to cruise to reelection victories this year. Those include big names, such as for example Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who sponsored bills preferred by Sheldon Adelson which would redefine the Wire Act to ban most kinds of on the web gambling.
Probably the most name that is vulnerable the list is that of Rick Scott, the Republican governor of Florida. He’s locked in a very tight battle with previous governor Charlie Crist, with virtually every recent poll showing a virtual dead heat involving the two men. Scott has helped bring some of the most challenging gambling that is anti-online in the country to Florida, a move that even caused subscription poker sites being legal in many states to take out of the market here.
Republicans Dominate List
Taking a look at the general list, 17 of the PPA’s appointed ‚jokers‘ are Republicans, while just five are Democrats. This is not terribly astonishing: while you will find supporters and detractors of on line gambling on both sides associated with the aisle, the national GOP platform includes a plank in support of banning online gambling, and Adelson, a prominent donor to the party, is passionately in favor of such a ban. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party has no formal position on the problem, giving people less incentive in the future out for the poker ban that is online.
Perhaps the most Democrat that is prominent who make the list was Martha Coakley, a candidate for governor in Massachusetts. The PPA claims that Coakley made the list because of ‚multiple general public statements against online poker and gaming.‘ Four Democratic House members will also be included regarding the list.
On the PPA’s page committed to ‚The Jokers,‘ a picture of each politician is displayed. Hitting the pictures offers information on why they made the list, along with contact information for that lawmaker. While the PPA does not explicitly tell users to vote against these applicants, it does ask in order to let them know that online gaming is an important issue to voters that they contact them.
A few of the listed candidates have actually made waves in the world of online poker in present years, even when they aren’t yet well-known to your public that is general. Greg Abbott, the Republican candidate for governor in Texas, normally their state’s Attorney General, and was certainly one of the key signatories to a letter by 15 attorneys general asking for an online poker ban that is federal. Marco Scavello may only be a State Representative in Pennsylvania, but gained notoriety for becoming the lead sponsor on a bill that might have criminalized online poker within the state.
California Chukchansi Casino Still Closed as Tribal Gaming War Continues
Warring factions at the California Chukchansi Casino remain poised to just take actions that could endanger public safety, authorities state. The property remains shut. (Image: pfadvice.com)
California’s Chukchansi Gold Resort & Casino should stay closed for the security of its own customers and employees: that’s the term from the state’s Deputy Attorney General, as being a dispute between two rival tribal factions shows no signs of abating.
The AG’s office this week asked a federal judge to keep the gaming property power down before the contentious problems can be resolved for good.
The Chukchansi was closed down following a power that is armed between two competing tribes, each wrestling for control of the casino’s ownership. On October 9 at around 6:30pm, 20 armed men entered the building and ordered security guards at gunpoint into an area of the casino where they were handcuffed and assaulted, forcing around 500 patrons and employees from the casino and hotel.
More details have since emerged of the dispute, which concerns two opposing teams now referred to as the Tex McDonald and Reggie Lewis factions. It seems the McDonald faction had been running the Chukchansi from its base at the tribe’s nearby business complex up until August, whenever Lewis faction entered the casino within the very early hours for the morning and occupied the 10th and 11th floors, effectively using over.
The initial schism in the tribe evidently arose following a disputed election.
Danger to Public Safety
The ousted McDonald team claimed it then stormed the premises in order to gather casino documents and audit information that were overdue for submission to the National Indian Gaming Commission. The Commission had threatened to close the casino down and issue it a $16 million fine if the accounts, some of which are eighteen months late, had been not submitted. The Commission said Friday that is last that had now gotten the audits.
However, the McDonald faction’s heavy-handed actions triggered the casino’s immediate closure by order of a federal judge. While no arrests could be built in reference to the armed stand-off, as it took place on tribal land, a restraining order happens to be in place to keep both teams apart. US District Judge Lawrence O’Neill has stated that the casino may have violated the state to its agreement, which requires it not to endanger general public safety.
‚All evidence points to the tensions and confrontations continuing, not abating,‘ stated the court papers filed by Deputy State Attorney General William Torngren this week. ‚The keys to reopening the casino come in the tribe’s arms,‘ added Torngren, whom states it is up now to officials that are tribal re solve the dispute.
No Federal Interference
Little progress has apparently been made since the dramatic incident. According to Joginder Dhillon, senior adviser for tribal negotiations for Ca Governor Jerry Brown, the 2 factions ‚remain poised to simply take actions that could threaten public security.‘
Madera County Sheriff John Anderson stated he hoped the casino’s continued closure would incentivize the tribe to find ground that is common. ‚Perhaps it will force the tribe to get its act together and do something positive,‘ he said.
The government that is federal meanwhile, said it might not step in to resolve the dispute. ‚The United States is ill-suited to make decisions that are such tribal countries,‘ said Kevin Washburn, the assistant secretary for Indian Affairs, in a page to the tribe. ‚I implore you to function together to eliminate this dispute for the good of your tribal government, tribal account, and the surrounding community that you are making this type of significant impact through an effective procedure of your economic enterprises.‘
PokerStars Ramps Up Rake as Amaya Backlash Grows
Few would consider PokerStars rake increase to fall underneath the category of ‚progress,‘ such as this classic William Hogarth print. (Image: A Rake’s Progress/William Hogarth)
A PokerStars statement this week that it will be rake that is increasing its cash games and tournaments on its dot.com client, the latest in a string of unpopular decisions, has ignited a person backlash against brand new owners Amaya Gaming.
The company’s announcement, which first showed up on poker forum TwoPlusTwo, has united the poker that is online in its indignation, with the finger pointed squarely at Amaya.
The changes, which will come into impact in two stages, initial week that is next on November 3, and also the second on January 1, 2015, will hit high-stakes cash-game players, heads-up cash game players, and Sit & Go players the hardest, and it has triggered many players to question the profitability of continuing to try out the overall game.
A sit-out boycott for the site is apparently currently being arranged.
PokerStars additionally stated this week it is subject to ’significant local taxes,‘ including the UK, Germany and Denmark, which are jurisdictions that have already seen their VIP programs reduced that it will be introducing extra charges for tournament rebuys and add-ons in European countries where.
Oahu is the time that is second a week that the company has caused a stink, having quietly added a 2.5 percent change price charge to deposits and withdrawals without first creating a formal announcement about the change in policy. Other decisions have caused consternation, too, such as the ditching of many of its sponsored pros, along with all of Full Tilt, not forgetting withdrawing suddenly from over 30 gray markets without previous warning.
Speaking about the changes that are recent this week, PokerStars Director of Communications Eric Hollreiser explained which they were a necessity because ‚the game is constantly changing and evolving, as is society and technology at large. Like most poker that is good,‘ he continued, ‚ we all know you need to adapt or risk being left out. The choices we make today aren’t for brief term gain; they’re made because we think they truly are the thing that is right tomorrow.
‚ we will continue to make tough phone calls to secure the game in the present making bold moves to most readily useful invest in the future growth of the game. Our goal is still to offer top, most exciting poker experience and keep consitently the poker universe growing,‘ Hollreiser included.
Is Sheldon Alderson Involved?
PokerStars will argue that the modifications bring its rake framework in line with the remaining portion of the online poker industry, and this is broadly real. But there is also a perception that is growing players that there’s huge stress on Amaya to recoup the $4.9 billion and incurred debt from the PokerStars takeover and so it’s trying to squeeze every final ounce of make money from an already hugely profitable company to the detriment of the poker ecosystem.
‚I not think that PokerStars really try to produce profit but alternatively there (sic) brand new owners are attempting to kill poker that is online‘ said one disbelieving poster on TwoPlusTwo. ‚This may sound absurd but seriously you shouldn’t be surprised if Sheldon Alderson (sic) is involved somewhere.‘
‚Wow. Should this be true, then Amaya are serious about jeopardizing their monopoly,‘ said another. ‚Wow. Terrible. This might be awful for your long-term traffic for everything except non hyper MTTs, pretty much, so that as MTTs are this kind of little % of stars rake that is overall has to be a terrible move assuming a competitor can begin siphoning off players (which will eventually take place).‘
One poster even mocked up a gravestone that is photoshopped bearing the epitaph: ‚PokerStars. 2001-2014. We were poker.‘
But could a player backlash affect pokerStars‘ really dominance? It is not likely. Many players won’t even notice the changes. The rest, well, in the first place, where would they go? PokerStars still delivers a rake that is competitive and has unparalleled liquidity when it comes to player pools, and that suggests its monopoly is probably staying put.
Amaya, however, has purchased very profitable online gambling companies of them all, and may want to think twice before tinkering way too much by having a winning formula.