- Joined
- Jan 14, 2008
- Messages
- 63,280
SOURCE
The battle for a regulated Sports Betting market in the nation’s most populated state hits a new snag as the latest ballot initiative proposed by one of
California’s largest Native American tribes is under attack
A representative from the state’s legal cardrooms is claiming that this proposal is nothing more than another attempt by tribal casinos to shut competitors down.
The current draft submitted by tribal leaders suggest limiting California’s Sports Betting offering to brick-and-mortar tribal casinos and the five racetracks located in the state. No mention of the legally operating private cardrooms, which have long skirted around California gambling laws due to the fact that they are player-backed as opposed to operating through a house bank.
Tribal leaders are now attempting to use the same feature that has allowed cardrooms to operate within the boundaries of the law to cut them out of the Sports Betting equation. Claiming that a 2000 ballot initiative gives tribal casinos exclusive rights when it comes to running house-banked games, Native American leaders look to expose the workaround that these cardhouses have long used to infringe on, what they feel are rightfully their profits.
California’s tribal casinos and cardrooms have been at odds with each other for years, and Native American leaders were quick to speak out on previous versions of proposed Sports Betting legislation.
Steve Stallings, chairman of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, had warned that lawmakers “should proceed with caution” when entertaining legislation that might grant operational rights to groups outside of the CNIGA.
The California Gaming Association argues that this proposal has more to do with shutting down cardrooms than it does for the advancement of Sports Betting in the state.
Pointing to Section 5.2 in the Private Attorneys General Act for the Gambling Control Act, Kirkland feels that the wording would allow tribes to target cardrooms directly as opposed to filing a lawsuit against the state over the controversial player-banked contests.
The initiative in question had been reworded to add that any entity or individual who felt that someone had violated the gaming law in question would be able to proceed with civil action after first filing a request with the Attorney General to initiate the action. Kirkland’s fear is that this essentially opens the doors for tribes to hold police power over the cardrooms they have long opposed.
Cardroom stakeholders seek more inclusive regulations when it comes to the introduction of Sports Betting, and with both New Jersey and Pennsylvania serving as case studies, they feel that opening the doors for a mobile market is the only way to truly capitalize off of the new market.
FULL ARTICLE HERE
The battle for a regulated Sports Betting market in the nation’s most populated state hits a new snag as the latest ballot initiative proposed by one of
California’s largest Native American tribes is under attack
A representative from the state’s legal cardrooms is claiming that this proposal is nothing more than another attempt by tribal casinos to shut competitors down.
The current draft submitted by tribal leaders suggest limiting California’s Sports Betting offering to brick-and-mortar tribal casinos and the five racetracks located in the state. No mention of the legally operating private cardrooms, which have long skirted around California gambling laws due to the fact that they are player-backed as opposed to operating through a house bank.
Tribal leaders are now attempting to use the same feature that has allowed cardrooms to operate within the boundaries of the law to cut them out of the Sports Betting equation. Claiming that a 2000 ballot initiative gives tribal casinos exclusive rights when it comes to running house-banked games, Native American leaders look to expose the workaround that these cardhouses have long used to infringe on, what they feel are rightfully their profits.
California’s tribal casinos and cardrooms have been at odds with each other for years, and Native American leaders were quick to speak out on previous versions of proposed Sports Betting legislation.
Steve Stallings, chairman of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, had warned that lawmakers “should proceed with caution” when entertaining legislation that might grant operational rights to groups outside of the CNIGA.
The California Gaming Association argues that this proposal has more to do with shutting down cardrooms than it does for the advancement of Sports Betting in the state.
Pointing to Section 5.2 in the Private Attorneys General Act for the Gambling Control Act, Kirkland feels that the wording would allow tribes to target cardrooms directly as opposed to filing a lawsuit against the state over the controversial player-banked contests.
The initiative in question had been reworded to add that any entity or individual who felt that someone had violated the gaming law in question would be able to proceed with civil action after first filing a request with the Attorney General to initiate the action. Kirkland’s fear is that this essentially opens the doors for tribes to hold police power over the cardrooms they have long opposed.
Cardroom stakeholders seek more inclusive regulations when it comes to the introduction of Sports Betting, and with both New Jersey and Pennsylvania serving as case studies, they feel that opening the doors for a mobile market is the only way to truly capitalize off of the new market.
FULL ARTICLE HERE
