Online gaming enthusiasts collectively rejoiced when the Sheldon Adelson-backed Restoration of America’s Wire Act (RAWA) died in Congress’ lame duck session. This certainly isn’t the last we’ll hear of Adelson’s efforts to ban online gaming. In fact, Nevada Senator Harry Reid just spoke about the bill, essentially saying that he agreed with Adelson’s views on iGaming being bad for America.
However, he would like to at least see a poker carve-out included in any attempt to ban online gaming. And this brings up the question of if an iGaming ban with legal online poker would be so bad. That said, let’s discuss this from poker players’ perspectives.
What would be good about RAWA with a poker carve-out?
What player wouldn’t love seeing iPoker opened up again across the US!? Before the UIGEA was signed into effect in 2006, online poker enjoyed an incredible boom as many Americans flocked to the cyber felt. Even up until Black Friday in 2011, iPoker was still going really strong in the US. So federal legalization would at least restore some of what’s been lost over the past 8-plus years. And let’s face it, the current state-by-state model isn’t getting much done for the average American player.
Another great thing to come out of a poker carve-out would be widespread advertising. New Jersey iGaming sites have already brokered deals with professional sports teams like the New Jersey Devils and Philadelphia 76ers. Just imagine the advertising possibilities if online poker became available in (almost) every state.
Of course, more advertising and federal legalization/regulation would entice far more recreational players into poker. Sure, we’re probably not looking at pre-2006 traffic, but at least we’d be seeing the pro-to-amateur ratio tipping back to a more-favorable level. And finally, we’d also see more poker sites enter the US, thus creating extra competition and driving software/games to better levels than what we’re currently seeing in Delaware, Nevada and New Jersey.
What would be bad about RAWA with a poker carve-out?
First off, there’s absolutely no guarantee that Reid would get a poker carve-out included in RAWA. This is just something that he plans to do if Congress ever passes the iGaming ban. Furthermore, should we take the Senator’s word at face value? Although only rumors, it’s been speculated that Reid has made some sort of deal with Adelson to help push RAWA through Congress. That said, if any of this is true and Adelson says no iPoker, then the carve-out wouldn’t be included.
Another problem here is that denying casino games would cut out a portion of recreational players who’d come for the casino gaming, but also enjoy some poker. Now others argue that casino games divert attention/money away from iPoker, however, it can’t be denied that in some cases, other forms of gaming draw players in too.
One more issue here is that it’s not exactly right to ban casino games, yet allow poker. Yes, there’s a skill element to poker that allows good players to win over time. But then again, it’s still a form of gambling for the large majority of players. So you get into an ethics argument here when online casino games are illegal while poker is completely fine.
Looking beyond all of these points, the most-likely scenario is that Adelson’s RAWA bill won’t make it through Congress anyways. However, the Poker Players Alliance has warned not to underestimate the 81-year-old casino magnate, who’s worth $37 billion. And if his deep pockets can buy enough politicians, then perhaps we’ll really be facing the possibility of RAWA passing.