Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gambling Disorder Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee sends gambling-disorder fund bill to Appropriations after split votes; measure to remain funded at higher level
Summary
After debate and two roll-call votes, the committee refused a do-not-pass motion then approved a do-pass recommendation, sending Senate Bill 22-05 (gambling disorder prevention and treatment fund) to Appropriations by a 7–4 vote. Lawmakers disagreed over funding levels and documentation of program activity.
The House Judiciary Committee split over Senate Bill 22-05, which would make permanent an increased allocation to the gambling-disorder prevention and treatment fund. After an initial "do not pass" motion failed, the committee later approved a do-pass recommendation, 7–4, and referred the bill to Appropriations.
Representative Wolfe led an early effort to table the measure with a "do not pass" motion, citing missing financial details from the Department of Human Services; that motion failed on a roll call. After further discussion and review of materials supplied to the committee, Representative Satrim moved a do-pass recommendation and Representative Carls seconded. The committee then voted 7–4 in favor of referring the bill to Appropriations.
Committee members differed on whether more oversight or information was needed. "They didn't make a very good case for it," Representative Olson said of fund administrators’ testimony and the data provided so far. Several members noted the department had supplied a follow-up email with figures shortly before the hearing; committee members said they would receive a fuller Gemini report at a later date.
Supporters argued the state is seeing significant gambling-related harms and needs sustained funding to prevent and treat gambling disorder. "We created this. We're responsible for this," Representative Satrim said, arguing the state has a role in addressing harms tied to expanded gaming. Some members objected on principle to increasing or making permanent funding without clearer evidence of program results; Representative White said he could not support "just throwing more money out there." Representatives also discussed whether the funding comes from gaming proceeds; staff confirmed the money comes from the charitable gaming operating fund, not the general fund.
The committee recorded the final do-pass referral to Appropriations by roll call: the motion passed 7 to 4 with three members absent and not voting. Representative Christiansen agreed to carry the bill when it returns from Appropriations.
Committee members requested additional financial detail, including a more complete accounting of client hours and the scope of services supported by the fund; a Gemini research contract and other line items were discussed in testimony but committee members said more clarity is needed before final appropriations decisions.
