The news on poker’s political front dominated this week. First the State government in Iowa was looking at developing online poker for state residents, then California was headed in the same direction, with state senators drawn to the projected injection of hundreds of millions of dollars into the State economy.
The logic argument is frustrating enough. Poker is a skill game, something proven with ease at the tables and off it (as a browse through the IFP library will prove), but it has proven ineffective as a tool to convince non-believers.
But is there a more direct approach to change? Will convincing governments, on a state or national level, come down to money?
Both Iowa and California senators were motivated by increased revenue, with the prohibition of online poker costing millions in a time where revenue is plummeting.
With the major operators currently banned (from processing payments to players, not technically from offering online poker) will the argument be won in the accounts departments, rather than the corridors, of power?