Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gambling Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Businesses push games-of-skill bills; SLED and Lottery warn of legal risks and machine proliferation
Summary
Two related bills (S 3-62, H 41-29) aimed at clarifying that activities where skill predominates are not gambling were advanced to full committee after extensive testimony from fishing and small-business interests; SLED and the state lottery warned the language could reopen questions about electronic gaming machines and cash payouts and asked for narrower or machine-specific carve-outs.
The committee advanced two related bills (S 3-62 and H 41-29) that would specify that activities in which skill predominates over chance are not gambling, after hours of testimony from industry groups, small-business owners and state agencies who warned of unintended legal consequences.
Supporters—including the South Carolina Boating and Fishing Alliance—argued the bills are needed to protect long-standing, skill-based competitions such as fishing tournaments, NASCAR events and professional golf from being swept into a narrow reading of the gambling statute. "South Carolina's $7,000,000,000 boating and fishing industry...I mean, people come and they'll stay for the entire series," said Geddes Bridal, president and CEO of the Alliance, urging lawmakers to protect tournaments that rely on entry fees.
Small-business owners and nonprofit leaders said ambiguity in court rulings has cost restaurants, bars and veterans' posts revenue after devices were seized or insurers raised premiums. Restaurant owners told the committee that a small number of skill-based machines provided modest, sometimes critical supplemental revenue and foot traffic.
SLED General Counsel Adam Whitsett and other law-enforcement witnesses opposed the bills as written. Whitsett said recent appellate decisions—most notably the Dragon's Ascent case—have been interpreted to reaffirm long-standing prohibitions on cash-payout electronic gaming devices, and he warned that the bills' language could be used to argue that skill-based electronic devices (including simulated-slot or reel-style skill machines) are lawful. "If this bill passes," Whitsett said, "I submit that the Dragon's Ascent precedent...will be reversed," and that would invite litigation and proliferation of cash-payout machines unless the legislature explicitly carves out or regulates devices.
The Education Lottery's deputy general counsel, David Ross, said the House amendment (which limits the carve-out to card-based games) reflects a concern to exclude video-poker and other machine-driven games; he warned that broader language could create retail and regulatory conflicts for the state’s licensed lottery retailers.
Committee members debated whether the legislature should make an explicit policy decision to legalize particular devices or instead craft narrow statutory carve-outs to protect tournaments and small businesses while preserving the state’s longstanding prohibition on cash-payout gaming machines. After extended questioning and cross-examination, the committee voted to report the measures favorably to full committee for further refinement.
