Push to Legalize Internet Poker Could Give U.S. Casinos Share of $25 Billion Pie

Dec. 6, 2010— -- Poker has been played by presidents and partisans alike for generations. But until now, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have tried to inhibit millions of Americans from participating in the popular game with other players online.

More than 2,000 websites currently offer users the chance to wager real cash in games of skill and chance, including poker, according to the American Gaming Association. But most of them are run by offshore companies, industry experts say.

Now some lawmakers want to allow U.S.-based casino companies to get into the game -- and a cut of the $25 billion-a-year pie -- by quietly pushing for a change in the law before the end of this year.

A draft bill, first reported by the Wall Street Journal and obtained by ABC News, would legalize online poker playing in the U.S., and establish licensing and reporting requirements for companies, as well as safeguards for consumers. It would also generate tax revenue from wagers, for state and federal governments.

Forms of online gambling other than poker would remain prohibited under the bill.

Legalization of online poker forums has long been sought by the U.S. casino industry which says federal gaming regulations have unfairly handicapped their business in a flourishing online marketplace and left American consumers vulnerable.

"There are no consumer protections, no standards for licensing, no rules on operations," said Alan Feldman, a spokesman for MGM Resorts International, who noted internet gambling is widespread across the U.S. despite federal law.

An estimated 15 million Americans play online poker for money through sites run out of foreign countries, according to the Poker Players Alliance.

"We're very strictly regulated. But then in the online space, there are all these unregulated, unlicensed, untaxed groups running internet gaming," Feldman said.

Gary Thompson, spokesman for Caesars Entertainment Corp., the country's largest gaming company, said he could not comment on the bill because of an SEC-mandated "quiet period," but acknowledged the industry has favored a change in the law.