Three Days Left For Georgia’s Sports Betting Passage

Georgia state’s House Higher Education Committee has been debating a series of bills that could usher in a new era for sports betting in Georgia. However, the journey to a consensus is proving to be a challenging one.

As of March 25, the House Higher Education Committee has been grappling with a package of bills that could bring Georgia’s sports betting business reality. However, the committee has yet to reach a consensus on the distribution of tax revenue from sports betting. The next step is a vote on changes such as increasing the tax rate, removing promotional deductions for operators, and altering the allocation of funding.

This is a crunch time for the sports betting industry in Georgia, insiders are skeptical about the passage of the online wagering package with just three legislative days remaining.

The bills under discussion comprise of SR 579 and SB 386. SR 579 is a constitutional amendment that would give the voters the power to legalize sports betting. SB 386 is the enabling legislation. If passed these bills would legalize online sports betting, with professional sports teams participating.

The debate over the constitutional amendment last week revealed that lawmakers are still far from a consensus on the shape of legal sports betting in Georgia.

One of the most contentious issues is the allocation of funds from online sports betting. As it currently stands, tax dollars are designated for Georgia’s HOPE (Helping Outstanding Pupils Educationally) merit-based scholarship program.

However, there have been discussions about whether these funds could be redirected to fully fund the state’s Pre-K program, include school lunches in the spend, or consider needs-based scholarships.

According to Bill Cowsert, a Republican and one of the sponsors of the bill, the current text allows the budget to decide the final destination of the funds. This is the third version of the bill, and each iteration has suggested a different formula for the allocation of the revenue.

The bill requires a two-thirds majority to pass a constitutional amendment, which neither party currently has. Therefore, the bill can’t pass without bipartisan support.

In the midst of these discussions, one cannot overlook the implications of sports betting on problem gambling. In earlier hearings, the committee heard from religious groups and individuals like Caroline York, a parent whose son struggled with gambling addiction, advocating against the bills.

Cowsert mentioned that funds for responsible and problem gambling could be available, but they are not specifically mentioned in the bill.

Another question that has surfaced is whether daily fantasy sports (DFS) should be regulated. A bill that proposed a framework for DFS, which currently operates in a legal gray area in Georgia, was rejected on March 1. Since the first wagering hearing this year, lawmakers have suggested including DFS in the sports betting bills, but it has not been added yet.