The midterm elections in November are drawing nearer, which is causing tensions to escalate between tribes, large sportsbook providers, and local cardrooms. The reason for this is that sports betting will soon be allowed in the state of California, which at this point is almost a given.

Each significant actor has their own thoughts on the precise adjustments that should be made to the legislation, and since there is the opportunity for gains worth millions of dollars, tensions are swiftly growing.

A Race Containing Two and a Half Horses

At this juncture, it is quite evident that just two potential courses of action are worthy of consideration. The first piece of legislation is known as the Tribal Sports Wagering Act. It is yet another effort on the part of California’s indigenous communities to regulate sports betting inside the state, and it will make it legal for tribal casinos and betting institutions to accept bets on sporting events. Californians for Solutions to Homelessness and Mental Health Support is the other candidate for this position. This proposal intends to legalize sports betting on a far broader scale, and it intends to include all major betting operators, including those that are run by tribal governments.

Both of these endeavors have strong financial support, giving them a chance to succeed in their respective endeavors. The third competitor in this race, cardroom operators, could not even make it beyond the starting line since the petition campaign for their legislation failed dismally. They were eliminated from the competition immediately after it began. Despite this, there is still a chance that they will be able to have an effect on the next conflict. 

Cardrooms in California have come together in order to oppose what they see as the bigger of the two evils, which is the Tribal Sports Wagering Act. These cardrooms are not satisfied to accept defeat, and as a result, they are now soliciting the assistance of local community leaders. Officials from the local government have spoken out in support of a political action group known as “Taxpayers Against Special Interest Monopolies.” This organization is mostly funded by owners of cardrooms.

Top 3 Online Bookmakers in California, CA, USA

• Slot Title
• Pay Back
• Key Features

1

$20 free bet

• Min. Deposit: $10
• Payout speed: 48 hours

$20 free betPlay NowOur score:

$20 free bet

Read more

2

50% first deposit bonus up to $250

• Min. Deposit: $10
• Payout speed: 15 minutes

50% first deposit bonus up to $250Play NowOur score:

50% first deposit bonus up to $250

Read more

3

50% first deposit up to $1,000

• Min. Deposit: $20
• Payout speed: 48 hours

50% first deposit up to $1,000Play NowOur score:

50% first deposit up to $1,000

Read more

Allowing More Freedom to Pursue Legal Action and Operations

They include members of the local Council, mayors, and even an Olympic athlete in the form of Brenda Villa, who has competed in the Olympics on four separate occasions. Their primary worries are unrelated to sports betting and instead center on the less obvious features of the tribal legislation, such as the one that would enable tribal casinos to offer games including roulette and dice. Additionally, it will allow tribes more freedom to pursue legal action against cardrooms even if the cardrooms have not broken any laws in the process of their operations.

Some Concerns Regarding the Effects on the Community and the Tribal Measure

The leaders of the community voiced their fears that the tribal policy would have a bad influence on the life of tiny villages, which depend on local cardrooms for the majority of their finance, and will only benefit a select few people. Tribal officials have not yet responded to these concerns, and it seems as if they are more concerned on dealing with their immediate rivalry in the face of the sportsbook operators and their internet measures. A statement made by Pat Fong Kushida, President and CEO of the California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce, that the online measure would be detrimental to local businesses and only serve to consolidate existing monopolies is eerily similar to the criticisms that are being leveled against the proposal that the tribes have put forward.