There is a race going on to see how the online gaming market is going to be run. While this is a complicated issue, we can make a simplified version of the competing forms.

1. STATE RUN- This is the leading contender right now, and would also be a disaster. Most states like Illinois, Maryland, Ohio and probably New York would tie this in to their state lotteries and have them controlled by their lottery commisions. The lotteries are "education" funding vehicles supported by the powerful teaching unions. These games are huge house edge games where no player with an IQ of over 75 would attempt to beat. They would not want competition to these games with low house edge games because no one would play games like quick draw (keno) and other sucker games. Therefore, they will monopolize all the games, or they will make the regulations so burdensome, that no one else will do business in their states. All states with powerful unions will create so many "management" positions, high minimum wages, and pension/medical plans that a playable game with low holds or rake will be impossible.

2. FEDERAL RUN- This will favor the big gaming corporations like Harrah's, MGM, and others. They will have games much more player friendly than state runs, but slightly less than offshore entities used to. They will have competition, but only amongst a chosen few who can afford the grease for ridiculous Federal licensing requirements. This is fake competition, where a gang of 10 or 15 zillionaires who hold majority stakes in these corporations share the market share amongst each other, just like they do with their girlfriends and congressional pay offs. These men aren't stupid though, so you may see some partnerships with big international gaming companies who are 15 years ahead of them, have customer bases, and have software that is tried and proven.

3. FREE MARKET- Probably no chance of this evolving, but a minimal amount of regulation would invite all companies both American and International to compete for consumers. This would be by far the best for consumers, with low holds, and maximum player loyalty rewards. Unfortunately, America stopped embracing true free market principals a long time ago, so chances of this is remote at best. But we can still hope that the protectionist nature of the first two examples can be defeated on a constitutional basis in the courts.