Georgia’s Casino Proposal Faces Challenges with Sports Betting

Georgia is once again considering expanding its gaming options, but this time, a new proposal could significantly reshape the state’s gambling landscape—if it passes. On February 5, members of the Georgia Senate introduced SR 131, a resolution that seeks to amend the state’s constitution, potentially allowing up to eight retail casinos to operate within its borders. This measure would also legalize sports betting, a significant shift in a state long resistant to gambling expansion.

However, the proposal comes with a key restriction: a ban on online gambling, a move that could have both positive and negative consequences for the bill’s fate. Unlike previous gambling-related bills introduced in Georgia, SR 131’s exclusion of online gaming sets it apart. But will this approach be enough to overcome years of legislative gridlock, or will it backfire?

SR 131 and Retail Gambling?

The core of SR 131 revolves around creating a regulatory framework that would issue up to eight licenses for brick-and-mortar casinos. In addition, it would grant the Georgia legislature authority to regulate both casino operations and sports wagering, creating new revenue streams for the state and potentially enhancing its entertainment offerings.

Currently, the Georgia Constitution bans most forms of gambling, reserving changes to this prohibition for voter approval. The amendment’s passage would, with voter ratification, create a state-level body responsible for overseeing these new gaming enterprises. According to the text of the resolution, gambling would be strictly confined to physical casino locations, with no off-site or online gambling permitted. This restriction on digital gambling may be a major factor in the proposal’s success or failure.

 

Land-Based Gambling: A Mixed Blessing?

While the restriction of gaming to in-person activities could be politically beneficial, especially in Georgia’s conservative political climate, it risks alienating key groups that support broader gambling legalization. By keeping gambling confined to land-based facilities, SR 131 might appeal to lawmakers who are wary of the broader expansion of online gaming. In a state that has long resisted online gambling measures, focusing on physical casinos may provide a palatable compromise for the legislature.

However, this exclusion of online gambling also introduces potential pitfalls. Many business leaders, particularly in the entertainment and sports sectors, have long advocated for online sports wagering as part of a larger push for gaming expansion. In previous years, bills that included online betting gained traction due to the backing of professional sports organizations and influential business figures. By removing this option, SR 131 could lose the support of these powerful stakeholders, who might view the exclusion as a missed opportunity for economic growth.

In the past, online sports wagering was viewed as a way to tap into new revenue sources, particularly with Georgia’s sports teams—including the Atlanta Falcons, Atlanta Braves, and Atlanta Hawks—growing in prominence. The failure to include online gambling in SR 131 may limit the proposal’s appeal to the broader public and business leaders who hoped for a more inclusive approach.

The proposed amendment faces significant hurdles before it reaches voters. In Georgia, a constitutional amendment must first pass both chambers of the state legislature with a supermajority (⅔ vote) before it can be placed on the ballot. Even if SR 131 clears this high bar, it must then secure a simple majority vote in the general election.

While there’s a chance that the amendment could garner enough legislative support, the exclusion of online gambling could lead to opposition from key constituencies. Business leaders and entertainment groups, who have pushed for a more expansive gaming industry in Georgia, may argue that SR 131 does not go far enough. Should their influence sway enough lawmakers, it could be the fatal blow to the proposal.

Moreover, even if SR 131 passes the legislature and receives voter approval, the restrictive language around gaming means that any future efforts to introduce online gambling would require yet another constitutional amendment. This creates a significant barrier for advocates who view online gaming as a crucial component of Georgia’s future gambling strategy.

 

By removing the option for online gambling, SR 131 could lose the support of powerful business and sports organizations, who have long advocated for a more expansive gaming approach. In the past, online sports wagering was seen as a way to tap into new revenue sources, particularly with Georgia's growing professional sports scene.

A Familiar Outcome?

For the past six years, Georgia lawmakers have attempted to expand the state’s gambling offerings, only to see each attempt fail. SR 131 represents another step in the ongoing struggle to legalize and regulate gaming, but the road ahead remains fraught with uncertainty. Despite the momentum behind the proposal, the exclusion of online gambling could once again prevent the state from making any meaningful changes.

SR 131’s emphasis on physical casinos, while appealing to certain conservative elements in the legislature, risks losing the broader support of the business community and the public. The complex political and constitutional challenges involved in expanding gambling beyond land-based venues also present significant roadblocks to future online gaming.

In the end, 2025 could very well end the same way the previous six years have in Georgia—with the state’s gambling status quo intact. Whether SR 131 is a breakthrough or just another false start remains to be seen, but it’s clear that Georgia’s struggle to legalize gambling will continue to be a key issue for the foreseeable future.