Federal Bill Seeks to Implement Sports Betting Guardrails

Posted on: September 12, 2024, 04:06h. 

Last updated on: September 12, 2024, 04:06h.

On Thursday, U.S. Rep. Paul Tonko (D-New York) formally introduced legislation that seeks to place federal regulations on the rapidly growing sports betting industry that’s today legal and operational in 38 states plus Washington, D.C.

SAFE Bet Act sports betting Paul Tonko
U.S. Rep. Paul Tonko discusses his federal sports betting bill outside the Capitol on Thursday, Sept. 12, 2024. Tonko’s SAFE Bet Act would require states to implement a slew of federal regulations into their sports betting markets. (Image: U.S. Rep. Paul Tonko)

Tonko’s Supporting Affordability & Fairness With Every Bet Act (SAFE Bet Act) would require state gaming regulators to amend their sports betting rules to include a series of conditions. If passed and signed into law, the federal statute would require sportsbooks to limit bettors to no more than five deposits per 24 hours and conduct “affordability checks” on customers seeking to make large wagers.

Such checks would require bettors to prove that they have the financial resources to risk that amount of money. Sportsbooks would also be prohibited from allowing bettors to make deposits on credit cards.

The SAFE Bet Act, if enacted, would additionally bar sports betting companies from advertising between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. and during all live sports programming. Advertisements with incentives like “risk-free bets” and deposit bonuses would be excluded.

The legislation additionally includes language prohibiting sportsbooks from utilizing artificial intelligence to craft promotions and bonuses for players based on their betting history. AI would also be banned from being used to produce microbetting odds and in-game lines.

Sin Industry Needs Sin Safeguards

Tonko, along with U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) who will champion the SAFE Act in Congress’ upper chamber, both represent states where retail and online sports betting is legal. The two believe sports betting presents dangerous societal consequences and therefore should be more regulated than it currently is.

Tonko likened the affordability checks to a drunk person trying to purchase or consume more alcohol.

“For over six years, the U.S. sports betting industry has been working itself deeper and more directly into the lives of the American people. Now, every single solitary moment of every sporting event has become a betting opportunity,” Tonko said outside the Capitol.

Whether you’re scrolling on social media, driving down the highway past billboards, or listening to your favorite podcast or radio station, sports betting ads are there to prompt you with an endless cascade of flashy promotions,” Tonko continued. “This relationship between the gambling industry and sports has reached intolerably dangerous levels. It’s well past time for Congress to step up and make a difference.”

Blumenthal said he signed on to support the SAFE Bet Act on mental health and addiction concerns.

We’re not banning gambling. We’re banning practices that exploit and abuse people,” Blumenthal said. “We’re stopping the promotions, enticements, bonuses, and credits that target losers.”

“Let’s be very clear: the gambling industry methodically and relentlessly targets losers,” Blumenthal declared. “That’s where the money is.”

SAFE Bet Called Out

Tonko and Blumenthal said state governments have largely failed to implement adequate safeguards into their sports betting regulations. The American Gaming Association (AGA) was quick to disagree.

Today’s regulated sports wagering operators are contributing billions in state taxes across the U.S., protecting consumers from dangerous neighborhood bookies and illegal offshore websites, and working diligently with over 5,000 state and tribal regulators and other stakeholders to ensure a commitment to responsibility and positive play,” Chris Cylke, the AGA’s senior vice president of government relations, said in prepared remarks.

“Six years into legal sports betting, introducing heavy-handed federal prohibitions is a slap in the face to state legislatures and gaming regulators who have dedicated countless time and resources to developing thoughtful frameworks unique to their jurisdictions, and have continued to iterate as their marketplaces evolve,” Cylke added.