Tuesday, October 25th, in a historic day for online poker, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee met at the request of Joe Barton (R-Texas). The meeting included representatives of various online gambling stakeholders including Indian tribes and consumer advocacy, horse racing, and youth protection groups. The meeting lasted for two and a half hours.

“Is the expansion of online gambling (by the US government) a good bet?” That is the question posed by Chairman Mary Bono of California. “The stakes are high and a showdown is likely on Capitol Hill in the months ahead.” Barton’s objective for calling this meeting was to build support for his bill to legalize online poker, HR 2366, and to create the sense of urgency needed to expedite HR 2366 to a vote in the coming months.

This is a highly critical time for online poker in the United States. With the United States government facing a massive budget deficit, the Budget Super Committee has until November 23rd to vote on a plan with $1.5 trillion in deficit reductions.

Washington insiders feel that online poker’s best chance at federal regulation is getting packaged in as part of the deficit plan. Otherwise, some fear it could be years before we see regulated poker in the United States. If the United States government won’t regulate online poker now, while in dire financial straits with billions of dollars to gain, perhaps it never will. Furthermore, several pro-online poker politicians are up for re-election this year. If they fail to be re-elected, online poker regulation may lose its momentum and miss this window of opportunity.

The good news of Tuesday’s meeting is that all parties involved, at the urging of Joe Barton, acknowledged the fact that millions of Americans play online poker and that there is no way to prevent them from doing so. The consensus is that the government needs to take some sort of action. The question is, what action will they take, and when?

Chairman Mary Bono went on record to say that 85% of Americans have gambled in their lives, including 60% in the last year. Gambling is legalized in 48 states except Hawaii and Utah. In a surprising figure, the government has estimated that last year alone over $16 billion was wagered on internet poker sites. Bono poised the question,”With billions of dollars on the table, can congress afford not to get involved?”

Joe Barton (R-Texas) was the biggest proponent of online poker’s cause, pointing out that “poker is the All-American game.” According to Barton, over 8 million Americans play online poker per month. “Nixon financed his first Congressional campaign partially with poker winnings from World War II.” He went on to say that President Barack Obama is an avid poker player, and it’s time we allow Americans to exercise their freedom to play poker. Showing his bi-partisan support for his bill to legalize online poker HR 2366, Barton closed strong. “If Joe Barton, Barney Frank, and Ron Paul are for it, who can be against it!”

Several of the key players at this meeting wanted guarantees that their stakeholders would get their piece of the online poker pie post regulation. Keith White of the National Problem Gaming Council insisted that a percentage of profits from online poker go towards measures to assist problem gamblers. A representative of the National Indian Gaming Association insisted that tribal casinos receive a period of exclusive access to the online poker realm, before other sites are allowed in. “Its important to understand what tribes have been through in history of the U.S. government.” Rep. Guthrie from, Kentucky, made a claim that online poker risks taking gambling revenue from Kentucky’s horse racing industry, and that the government risks endangering hundreds of thousands of horse racing industry jobs with the regulation of online poker.

That’s when the meeting heated up and things got interesting. Three members of the panel made some bold and somewhat misguided statements criticizing online poker. Parry Aftab of Wired Safety and Dan Rohmer of the Annenberg Public Policy Center went into lengthy discussions about the importance of keeping children away from online poker, with no reference to current measures of identity verification which online poker sites have been using for years. Another panel member insisted that online poker sites find a way to post the house edge as a percentage against recreational players, when sites already openly publish their rake percentages.

Then Kurt Eggert, professor at the Chapman School of Law, went on the offensive against online poker. With seemingly little knowledge of online poker, Eggert claimed that “poker assisted software” allows players to play perfectly and that bots make online poker unbeatable. Eggert even went so far as to suggest that poker sites need to rank players based on winnings and attach a numerical rank next to each player’s screen name at the table, so players know the skill level of their opponent at all times!

Former Senator Al D’Amato, the current chairman of the Poker Player’s Alliance, did something rather unexpected. Rather than debate these bogus claims, in a strategic move, whose result only time will tell, D’Amato went along with them. In the court of law, if a victim cannot be named, there can be no crime. That is why there must always be at least one person named in class action lawsuits. By allowing minor problems of online poker to be exaggerated, such as underage players, poker bots, and Poker Tracker, D’Amato sent the message that government intervention in online poker is needed now. Hopefully there was a strategic reason why the potential fraud of $300 Million in Full Tilt player deposits and the UB cheating scandal a few years back were almost entirely omitted from the conversation.

After considering all the evidence at hand, Mary Bono closed, “As Chairman of the subcommittee, let me be clear about two things. First we will be very thorough in examining a wide range of issues in regards to internet gambling before coming to any conclusions. Secondly, at the end of the day we will do what is best for American consumers.” Bono’s insistence that online poker legislation not be rushed, combined with the overall lack of basic knowledge about online poker by the panel, does not bode well for the cause, but hopefully Barton and D’Amato have something up their sleeves in the coming weeks.

She gave a ten day period in which panel members must remain available for questioning. All parties in attendance submitted extensive written reports, giving their opinion about whether or not the government should regulate online poker. Now we wait for the finding of this meeting to be released in the coming weeks, and for future meeting to be scheduled. In the best case scenario, a more informed discussion of online poker can be had in the House of Representatives, a consensus can be reached, and online poker bill HR 2366 will be put included in deficit legislation by November 23rd.