Judiciary Committee advances sweepstakes bill after heated debate, tables Rutherford amendment

The House Judiciary Committee favorably reported Senate Bill 3, known as the sweepstakes bill, after lawmakers debated whether sweepstakes-style exceptions have been used to justify electronic gambling machines.

"The only bill from the constitutional law subcommittee is senate 3, which is known as the sweepstakes bill," Mr. Bannister told the committee as he introduced the measure and the subcommittee's recommendation. Supporters said the bill clarifies that existing statutes provide no exception for electronic gambling devices masquerading as sweepstakes games. "It just clarifies that that was not an exception to the prohibition against gambling devices, electronic gambling devices," Bannister said.

Members questioned whether the bill would unintentionally bar charitable raffles at organizations that sell alcohol; Mr. Bannister said current law already restricts raffle activities for holders of alcohol permits and noted a separate charitable-raffles bill would address lawful fundraising for 501(c)(3) groups. Representative Rutherford introduced an amendment aimed at making magistrate-court determinations about the permissibility of machines binding on law enforcement unless reversed on appeal. Rutherford argued his change would prevent repeated seizures and "judge shopping" and would protect small businesses that rely on legitimately designed skill-based machines.

The committee voted to table Rutherford's amendment by a division vote, 14-6. The committee then recorded a favorable report on SB3, with the chair announcing the ayes and the committee moving the bill forward.

The committee did not take additional amendments on the floor; the next procedural steps are to transmit the committee report according to House rules.