Georgia Betting not on the Minds of State Senate Majority
Published March 21, 2020 by Lee R
Georgia is a salient reminder: federal approvals do not guarantee state regulation.
Sports wagering across the US is spreading like wildfire, but even in a hotbed of betting such as the US, the storm is not perfect.
Cold Spring in Georgia
The Georgia state example is in this case the exception that proves the rule. In a huge sports state, two separate bills seeking to legalise sports wagering in Georgia have died after failing to beat state-imposed legislative deadlines.
The Failed Amendments
Georgia State amendments Senate Bill 403 and House Resolution 378 both failed to cross over from one house to the other by March 12, the 28th day of the session.
Authors of 403
Authored by Senator Bert Jones, SB 403 was introduced to the Georgia Senate in February with the additional support of Senators Jeff Mullis, Brandon Beach, Ed Harbison and David Lucas. SB 403 was sought to permit mobile sports betting in the state under the care of a new gaming commission.
The HR 378 Movement
Introduced in January 2019 by author Ron Stephens, HR 378 sought to amend the Constitution to permit all forms of betting, bingo games, raffles and gambling in the state with guidelines for the establishment of a gaming commission to regulate the market with restrictions against off-track or off-site pari-mutuel betting, casino or sports betting.
The Crossover Day Deadline
If a Constitutional Amendment resolution is not passed out of its chamber of origin by what has come to be known as Crossover Day in the state, it gets shelved until the following year's legislative session.
Snowball's Chance
The one glimmer of hope remaining for betting in Georgia this year is the amendment of either aforementioned bill to a “live” for this year’s session, since local bills and private resolutions are Constitutionally immune to Crossover Day.
Outlook
The results are a great reminder that the repeal of PASPA at the federal level is not an automatic, and operators have to be cognizant of the intricacies of the jurisdictions of each state in which they want to apply or lobby.
