TESTIMONY OF STEVEN J. MILLER, CALIFORNIA STATE ...

TESTIMONY OF STEVEN J. MILLER, CALIFORNIA STATE DIRECTOR on behalf of

THE POKER PLAYERS ALLIANCE

California General Assembly The Committee on Governmental Organization

April 27, 2015

Chairman Gray, Vice-Chairman Linder and distinguished members of the Committee on Governmental Organization, I would like to thank you for allowing me to testify. I am the Steven Miller, California Director of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), an organization of 1.2 million American poker enthusiasts. In California we boast more than 90,000 Poker Players Alliance members. Not only am I a representative of the Poker Players Alliance, but I’m also an avid poker player myself. I play at card rooms, casinos, charitable events and home games. I would love nothing more than to be able to once-again play online. I am pleased to serve as a resource to help you better understand how Internet poker is already being regulated effectively in the United States and throughout the world, and why regulation of Internet poker is the right course for the California Legislature to pursue.

As an organization, the PPA has been at the forefront of advocating for sensible state and federal policies and we hope California will pass legislation that seeks to establish strong consumer protections and accountability for Internet poker.

Any effort to regulate Internet poker should not be viewed as an expansion of gambling in California, but rather as a consumer safety issue. Today, citizens of this state have access to online poker, online casino games and online sports betting – but they are forced to do so on foreign sites, none of which are properly licensed or regulated by this government. Authorizing internet poker is about corralling the current unregulated marketplace and turning it into a system that is safe for consumers and accountable to regulators and our government. Any regulatory effort should mandate technologies to protect consumers from fraud, eliminate underage access,

2

mitigate compulsive gambling behaviors and establish funding for the treatment and prevention of problem gambling. The legislation should provide for an open and competitive market that will foster innovation. It is also important for California to consider a system that allows for it to share players with other regulated jurisdictions.

We know regulated markets work. We can look to the other U.S. states, and we also have the benefit of learning from Europe, where Internet gaming has been regulated for more than ten years. Today, in the U.S. and in regulated markets throughout the world, it is required that Internet gaming companies consent to audits, implementation of anti-money laundering compliance programs and multi-step identity verification processes, bot detection, and other regulatory measures. These operators employ “best of breed” technologies that protect minors and problem gamblers, ensure that the games are fair, and site block players in prohibited jurisdictions. Additionally, regulated operators are accountable to the players, regulators, and law enforcement, and they are continually reviewed to ensure they are meeting and exceeding the prescribed technical safeguards. This is exactly what can and should be happening today in California.

Of course, there are those who will advocate for a ban on Internet poker. I urge members of the committee to reject this foolhardy proposition that would only serve to harm the vulnerable populations that regulation properly protects. As a player organization, the Poker Players Alliance takes consumer protections very seriously. Given the unjustifiable position of Internet gaming prohibitionists, I would argue that we are advocating for a far more reasonable and effective approach to consumer protections than those who simply stick their heads in the sand.

3

I am here today to strongly urge existing gaming operators in this state to set aside your competitive instincts and work collectively to create a market where everyone wins – online poker operators, online poker players, and the State of California. Consumers want choice in the marketplace, and the movement to exclude certain trusted providers through “bad actor” provisions should be seen as nothing more than an attempt to lock out competition. And that limits consumer choice. Quite frankly, the Legislature should not be picking winners and losers. State regulators are in the strongest position to make the determination of operator suitability. Lawmakers should legislate, regulators should regulate and the players just want to play.

I can do my shopping, banking, and I can even purchase a home online. It’s past time we are allowed to play the game we love online once again. Thank you. I’m happy to answer any questions you may have.

4