{"id":31327,"date":"2019-12-10T16:12:00","date_gmt":"2019-12-10T17:12:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.pokerscout.com\/?p=31327"},"modified":"2019-12-11T12:56:18","modified_gmt":"2019-12-11T12:56:18","slug":"proposed-rule-change-could-put-california-card-rooms-out-of-commission","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.pokerscout.com\/proposed-rule-change-could-put-california-card-rooms-out-of-commission\/","title":{"rendered":"Proposed Rule Change Could Put California Card Rooms Out Of Commission"},"content":{"rendered":"
The seemingly never-ending struggle to establish a legal framework for gambling outside of tribal casinos in the Golden State<\/strong> has taken yet another turn. New proposed California card room<\/strong> changes may prove as ineffectual as their predecessors.<\/p>\n Like previous attempts to reform California card room operations, the state may fall short in actually enforcing the modified rules. The most recent proposal has received strong opposition.<\/p>\n The California Bureau of Gambling Control<\/strong> has an unenviable task. That is, enforcing unsettled state law.<\/p>\n The latest attempt at that is a new regulation that would affect the \u201cbanking\u201d portion of California blackjack<\/strong> games. More specifically, it addresses the role of third-party proposition players<\/strong>.<\/p>\n In the current system, players are periodically offered the chance to assume role of banker, but are free to decline. When players decline, the third-party players, who are registered with the state and pay a percentage to the cardrooms, can continue in that role uninterrupted.<\/p>\n The new proposal would require the role of the banker to rotate every two hands<\/strong>. If all players decline, the game must end.<\/p>\n Players would be free to start a new game or move to a different table. The new rules don\u2019t dictate that each player must take a turn as the banker, but simply that the same player can\u2019t hold that position for more than two consecutive hands.<\/p>\n While this is somewhat about how the CBGC interprets state law, there is a bigger dynamic at play. Two equally-powerful forces in California are at odds with each other.<\/p>\n Tribal casinos<\/strong> feel California law gives them exclusive right to offer most card games, including Blackjack-style contests. They maintain that California cardrooms offering such games constitute illegal gambling<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Cardrooms, however, feel they operate in a legal loophole<\/strong>. Because the casino is not backing the bets with house money, but rather just facilitating the games for a commission, they have been able to operate.<\/p>\n That dispute has led to tribal casinos filing suit against the state in the past. Through the litigation, the casinos hope to force the CBGC to comply with their wishes.<\/p>\n Because the cardrooms have operated without penalty for decades, the CBGC is hesitant. Cardrooms also have the support of local governments who they pay taxes to.<\/p>\n Thus, the CBGC is left to thread a needle. It has to find a way to appease tribal casinos without destroying the cardrooms altogether.<\/p>\n Like with previous proposals, California residents have an opportunity to voice their opinions. The CGBC has three public hearings<\/strong> next week.<\/p>\n The California Gambling Control Commission<\/strong>, which the CBGC is a part of, meets twice next week. The first is on Monday, Dec. 16 in Sacramento<\/a>.<\/p>\nThe newest proposed California cardroom changes<\/span><\/h2>\n
The proposed changes attempt to settle an industry feud<\/span><\/h2>\n
The details on the next two CGCC public meetings<\/span><\/h2>\n