Blog

  • Georgia Lawmakers Push to Legalize Casinos and Sports Betting in Major Policy Shift

    Georgia Lawmakers Push to Legalize Casinos and Sports Betting in Major Policy Shift

    Georgia, long known for its resistance to gambling, may finally be on the verge of a dramatic shift. A new bill—Senate Resolution 131—could put the decision in the hands of voters, opening the door for at least eight casinos and legalized sports betting. If successful, this could mark a significant change for the Peach State, bringing in millions in tax revenue and reshaping its economy.

    A High-Stakes Debate Over Gambling in Georgia

    Georgia has stood firm against gambling for decades. Unlike many other states, it has no casinos, and even sports betting has remained off-limits. But state senators backing the bill argue that legalizing gambling would keep money within the state, rather than letting it flow to underground markets or neighboring states with friendlier laws.

    Sen. Brandon Beach, one of the bill’s sponsors, has been vocal about what Georgia stands to gain. He pointed to upcoming major sporting events, including the College Football Playoff National Championship, the Super Bowl, and FIFA World Cup games. According to Beach, Georgia’s refusal to legalize betting isn’t just missing out on tax revenue—it’s also enabling unregulated offshore betting sites that operate without consumer protections.

    It’s not the first time lawmakers have attempted to change the status quo. Prior efforts to legalize gambling have fallen short. However, new polling from the University of Georgia suggests the tide may be turning, with over 60% of voters now in favor of legal sports betting.

    What the Bill Proposes

    The bill outlines a clear framework for legal gambling in Georgia, but it’s not a free-for-all. The proposal:

    • Allows for at least eight casinos across the state.
    • Legalizes sports betting but excludes online casinos.
    • Limits gambling to physical casino facilities with licensed operators.
    • Sets a tax rate of 20% on gross gaming income.
    • Establishes a Georgia Gaming Commission to regulate and oversee the industry.

    If passed, voters would decide on the constitutional amendment in November 2026. That means Georgia residents would have the final say on whether they want casinos and sports betting in their state.

    What Could This Mean for Georgia’s Economy?

    The financial impact could be massive. Supporters believe a legalized gambling industry could funnel millions into state coffers, benefiting public services and economic growth.

    Gov. Brian Kemp has historically remained neutral on the issue, but he has emphasized that any proposal must not undermine Georgia’s lottery system or the HOPE scholarship, which funds education for Georgia students.

    A quick look at neighboring states shows why some lawmakers are pushing for the change:

    State Casinos Legal? Sports Betting Legal?
    Tennessee No Yes
    Florida Yes Yes
    Alabama No No
    North Carolina Yes Yes
    Mississippi Yes Yes (including online)

    With Mississippi expanding online betting and Texas considering similar measures, Georgia risks falling further behind in potential tax revenue.

    Opposition Remains, But Momentum Is Growing

    Despite the growing support, opposition to gambling legalization remains strong. Religious groups and conservative lawmakers argue that casinos could lead to addiction, crime, and financial hardship for vulnerable communities.

    Others believe the revenue projections may be overly optimistic. While tax dollars from gambling could boost state funding, critics question whether the costs—such as increased regulation and addiction services—might offset those gains.

    Still, momentum appears to be on the side of legalization. With neighboring states embracing gambling and public opinion shifting, Georgia’s stance on betting may soon change. The real question is whether lawmakers can craft a plan that wins over both voters and skeptics in the legislature.

    A final decision is still years away, but if this bill moves forward, Georgia could be on track to transform its gaming landscape for the first time in history.

  • SOFTSWISS Game Aggregator Expands to 27,800+ Games, Strengthens Global Footprint

    SOFTSWISS Game Aggregator Expands to 27,800+ Games, Strengthens Global Footprint

  • Oklahoma Lawmakers Renew Push for Sports Betting with Two Competing Bills

    Oklahoma Lawmakers Renew Push for Sports Betting with Two Competing Bills

    Oklahoma legislators are once again taking a swing at legalizing sports betting, introducing two separate proposals aimed at bringing the industry into the state. But as familiar debates over tribal exclusivity and financial viability resurface, the road ahead remains uncertain. With Native gaming interests split and Governor Kevin Stitt’s stance unclear, the battle for sports betting legalization is far from settled.

    Two Bills, Two Visions

    State Senator Dave Rader (R-Tulsa) and State Senator Casey Murdock (R-Felt) have each put forward a plan to legalize sports betting in Oklahoma. While both bills seek to regulate and tax sports wagers, they take very different approaches to the issue.

    Rader’s Senate Bill 125 (SB 125) proposes that all sports betting activity remain under existing tribal gaming compacts, ensuring that Native American tribes maintain control over the market. On the other hand, Murdock’s Senate Bill 164 (SB 164) adopts a more open-ended approach, allowing non-tribal entities to enter the space—a stance that aligns with Governor Stitt’s past preferences for a broader, less tribal-restricted gaming industry.

    The key differences between the bills raise big questions:

    • Should Oklahoma keep sports betting under tribal control, or should commercial operators be allowed in?
    • How would either approach impact state revenues and gaming compacts?
    • Will lawmakers finally push a bill through, or will the effort stall once again?

    The Demand is Clear—But So Are the Hurdles

    Sports betting is already happening in Oklahoma—just not legally. Senator Murdock pointed out that residents frequently travel to Kansas to place bets, a fact underscored by geolocation data.

    “I went to a conference last summer on sports betting, and a company that does geo-fencing showed me a map of Oklahoma. You could see people on I-35 headed to Kansas trying to place bets. As soon as they got into Kansas, you saw massive amounts of green dots,” Murdock said.

    Despite the clear demand, legalizing sports betting in Oklahoma has been an uphill battle. Past attempts never made it to a full legislative vote, often getting stuck in committees or withdrawn before gaining traction. The question isn’t just whether Oklahoma wants sports betting—it’s about how it should be implemented.

    Tribal Nations Hold the Cards

    The Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association (OIGA) hasn’t taken an official stance on the bills, but tribal leaders have been cautious. Their position is clear: any change to gaming laws must benefit the tribes, who currently hold exclusive gaming rights under compacts with the state.

    Matthew L. Morgan, chairman of OIGA, stressed that sports betting must make financial sense for all involved. The issue? Sports betting isn’t a major moneymaker compared to casino staples like slot machines.

    “Any proposed new or modified gaming offering must make sound economic sense for everyone involved,” Morgan stated.

    That’s a big deal. While sports betting gets a lot of attention, its profit margins are thin. Casinos make far more money on slot machines, which require fewer operational costs and offer higher returns. If sportsbooks aren’t a major revenue driver, tribes may not see much incentive to fight for them—especially if the state tries to cut them out of the deal.

    Governor Stitt’s Role in the Debate

    Governor Kevin Stitt’s stance on sports betting has been inconsistent. He previously advocated for opening the market beyond tribal gaming, a position that strained his relationship with many Native nations.

    His past clashes with tribes over gaming compacts could create a roadblock for any sports betting proposal. The Cherokee Nation and other tribes may be unwilling to renegotiate gaming agreements while Stitt remains in office.

    “Talking with some people who are very involved in Indian Country in Oklahoma, they’re almost just kind of glad to wait out his term when [Stitt] leaves office,” said gaming analyst Ryan Butler.

    This political tension means that even if a bill makes it through the legislature, getting tribal support—or avoiding a legal fight—could be another challenge.

    What’s Next?

    The battle over sports betting in Oklahoma isn’t just about passing a law. It’s about who controls the industry, how profits are shared, and whether the state and tribes can find common ground.

    The fate of SB 125 and SB 164 will play out in the coming months, but one thing is certain: legal or not, sports betting is already a part of Oklahoma’s economy. The question is whether lawmakers, tribes, and the governor can finally agree on how to regulate it.

  • Casino Guru Calls for Final Nominations as Awards Deadline Nears

    Casino Guru Calls for Final Nominations as Awards Deadline Nears

  • Indiana Lawmaker Pushes for Casino Site Study After License Relocation Stalls

    Indiana Lawmaker Pushes for Casino Site Study After License Relocation Stalls

    A proposal to relocate one of Indiana’s underperforming casino licenses has stalled in the legislature, but the conversation isn’t over yet. A new bill seeks to commission an independent study to analyze where future gaming establishments should be placed across the state.

    Failed Relocation Sparks Fresh Approach

    State Sen. Andy Zay, R-Huntington, had initially pushed for Full House Resorts to transfer its gaming license from Rising Sun to Allen County, arguing that a new location could reinvigorate revenue. That proposal, however, never made it past the Senate Public Policy Committee.

    Sen. Ron Alting, R-Lafayette, who chairs the committee, opted not to bring the measure to a vote, effectively killing it—at least for this session. Instead of dropping the issue entirely, Zay is pivoting to a broader strategy.

    A Study to Rethink Casino Placement

    Zay’s latest proposal, Senate Bill 43, calls for a statewide study to examine where casino licenses could be best utilized. The Indiana Gaming Commission (IGC) would work with an independent consultant to determine three prime locations for future casino sites.

    “It is beyond time that the state strategically looks into the performance and location of our gaming licenses in Indiana,” Zay said in a statement. He believes the findings could help lawmakers make more informed decisions moving forward.

    This type of study is often used in legislative processes to lay the groundwork for policy shifts, especially when direct action lacks immediate political backing.

    Why Rising Sun’s Casino License Matters

    Rising Sun, a small city on Indiana’s southeastern border, has struggled to maintain gaming revenues amid increased competition from neighboring states. Full House Resorts, the company holding the license, has sought a move to a more populous area.

    But relocating gaming licenses isn’t a simple process. Indiana’s gaming industry operates under tight regulations, and any shifts require legislative approval. The failure of Zay’s relocation proposal highlights just how complex these decisions can be.

    Could a Study Influence Future Casino Expansion?

    While the proposed study wouldn’t automatically lead to a license transfer, it could provide lawmakers with a clearer picture of where gaming expansion might make the most sense.

    A few potential outcomes could emerge from such an analysis:

    • Identification of high-revenue potential areas: The study could spotlight counties or cities where a casino would generate stronger economic benefits.
    • Impact on existing casinos: Indiana has multiple casinos already operating—would moving a license harm them?
    • Legislative momentum for a future proposal: If the study finds compelling evidence for a move, lawmakers might be more inclined to take action down the road.

    What Comes Next?

    For now, Senate Bill 43 must clear legislative hurdles before any study takes place. Lawmakers will debate its necessity, potential costs, and implications for Indiana’s gaming industry.

    Even if approved, the study’s findings wouldn’t guarantee a license relocation. But they could shape future discussions on how Indiana manages its gaming assets—a topic that likely won’t go away anytime soon.

  • UK Gambling Commission Opens Consultation on Gaming Machine Standards

    UK Gambling Commission Opens Consultation on Gaming Machine Standards

  • Play’n GO Unveils Potion of Madness, A Comic Book-Inspired Slot with a Chaotic Twist

    Play’n GO Unveils Potion of Madness, A Comic Book-Inspired Slot with a Chaotic Twist

  • New Hampshire Lawmakers Reject Proposal to Raise Sports Betting Age

    New Hampshire Lawmakers Reject Proposal to Raise Sports Betting Age

  • Thailand Weighs Expanding Casino Space in Proposed Entertainment Complex Bill

    Thailand Weighs Expanding Casino Space in Proposed Entertainment Complex Bill

  • BCLC to Open British Columbia’s First Retail Sportsbook Lounges

    BCLC to Open British Columbia’s First Retail Sportsbook Lounges