Share
The effort to legalize online casinos in Arkansas is now officially afoot, as was hinted at by a proposal last week to amend the state’s constitution. The new proposal would allow the state’s gambling licensees to offer digital table games, live dealer games, and online slots to players in Arkansas, while increasing the penalties for unlicensed gambling.
As the bill moves forward, debate is likely to center on whether a constitutional amendment is necessary to legalize iGaming in Arkansas and the potential impact on licensees’ land-based casino revenue. The licensees have expressed disparate opinions on the subject.
HB 1861 pushes online casino conversation forward
On March 19, Arkansas Rep. Matt Duffield put forth HB 1861 with 13 other of the body acting as co-sponsors. The bill is currently pending scheduling in the House’s Judiciary Committee.
At this time, there is no companion bill in the Arkansas Senate. Neither Duffield nor any of the co-sponsors are on the House Judiciary Committee.
HB 1861 has four primary effects in relation to gambling. It increases the classification of “the operation of an interactive gaming system without a casino license” to a Class D felony. Additionally, it expands the offerings for gaming licensees to include online casino play.
Provisions in the bill would also establish a lottery, separate from the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery, with proceeds funding payments to athletes at the University of Arkansas. Finally, the bill establishes a state of emergency related to illegal gambling in the state and the need for additional funds to those athletes.
For many people in Arkansas, the potential for legal iGaming could be of greatest interest. That part of the bill could also draw some opposition.
Casino licensees not uniform in stance toward online casino play
Currently, there are three land-based casinos in Arkansas and two of them have expressed their sentiments toward iGaming. Those sentiments are opposing.
Saracen Casino Resort Chief Marketing Officer Carlton Saffa has been among the most vocal proponents of online casino play in Arkansas. At the same time, representatives of Oaklawn Racing Casino Resort have stated that they believe iGaming would be a net loss for their gambling revenues.
So far, Southland Casino Hotel staff have not taken any public positions on the issue. HB 1861 moving forward might force them to take a side.
The bill’s proposal to levy new penalties for unlicensed gambling could also spark antagonistic responses.
Prohibitions target sweepstakes-based online casinos
HB 1861 makes a strong move to deter unlicensed gambling, specifically sweepstakes-based online games. In Arkansas, Class D felonies carry potential consequences of as much as six years in prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000.
The bill includes a provision for online games that utilize “a dual-currency system of payment that allows the player to exchange the currency for a prize, award, cash, or cash equivalent, or a chance to win any prize, award, cash, or cash equivalent, and simulates” casino-style gaming or sports wagering. It also states that the articles do not apply to sweepstakes without those payment systems and/or that don’t simulate iGaming or sports wagering.
If the bill becomes law in its current form, it could face court challenges over these limitations on sweepstakes and parties that feel a new amendment to the Arkansas Constitution is necessary to enshrine iGaming. This bill becoming law would also represent a furious pace for state legislatures due to the calendar for 2025.
Session dates leave little time for debate
In odd-numbered years, the Arkansas legislature holds far shorter sessions than it does in even-numbered years. For 2025, the session concludes on April 11.
That gives proponents just over three weeks to get HB 1861 through both chambers in Little Rock and through Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders‘ potential veto. Because of that tight window, 2025 could act as more of a reading of the room for Duffield and the other sponsors.
Either way, the introduction of HB 1861 escalates the conversation that Arkansas Sen. Bryan King began with filing his amendment proposal in January. Many voices could the conversation due to that escalation.
