Judiciary committee advances sweepstakes bill to clarify ban on electronic gambling machines

The House Judiciary Committee advanced Senate Bill 3 on a favorable report after lawmakers said the measure removes an exception that some operators have used to justify running electronic gambling machines.

Mr. Bannister, reporting for the constitutional law subcommittee, told the panel that the attorney general and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) testified some businesses were using a sweepstakes exception to the gambling statute to keep video-poker-style machines in operation. "The only bill from the constitutional law subcommittee is senate 3, which is known as the sweepstakes bill," he said, and added the bill "clarifies that that was not an exception to the prohibition against gambling devices, electronic gambling devices." (Mr Bannister)

Supporters argued the bill simply enforces the existing prohibition on electronic gambling devices and closes a loophole. Representative Rutherford proposed an amendment to make magistrate-court determinations about whether a machine is legal binding on law enforcement until reversed on appeal. Rutherford said the amendment was intended to stop what he called "judge shopping" by law enforcement and repeated seizures of the same machines even after a magistrate ruled them legal: "They can keep coming back because the law currently does not bind them by the magistrate's decision." (Representative Rutherford)

Opponents and other members raised concerns about the amendment's practical effect and whether the bill's language would unintentionally bar common charitable fundraising activities such as raffles when alcohol is served. Mr. Murphy asked whether the change would prevent organizations that sell beer and wine from holding raffles; Mr. Bannister replied that a separate charitable-raffles bill was pending for 501(c)(3) organizations and that the sweepstakes bill addresses the narrow exception used to justify electronic gambling devices. (Mr Murphy; Mr Bannister)

The committee voted to table the Rutherford amendment by show of hands and recorded the tabling at 14 to 6. The panel then gave Senate Bill 3 a favorable report by the same margin. (Chair)

The committee moved on after the vote; the favorable report sends the bill back to the Senate or on to the next step in the House process per regular legislative procedure.

The committee did not adopt the Rutherford amendment and did not alter the sweepstakes bill language on the floor of this session.