The legislative process serves an important purpose, and in this case, it worked out favorably for everyone in Colorado.
Colorado SB-23-259, also known as the Extension of Credit in Support of Limited Gaming, successfully passed through both the state Senate and House before being approved by Governor Jared Polis.
A horrible idea, regardless of you look for it
Senate Bill 23-259 aimed to authorize casinos to grant credit to gamblers, potentially creating a debt-driven environment where players could gamble beyond their means. Despite receiving bipartisan support from the Senate, the bill raised concerns for both casinos and players. The bill claimed to facilitate out-of-state high-rollers to gamble without carrying large sums of cash, but Governor Polis did not support it.
Governor Polis expressed his reservations about the bill, stating that if the intention was to cater specifically to out-of-state high-rollers, the credit line should be targeted exclusively to them. However, he believed that the bill, as currently drafted and passed, could lead to problematic gambling behavior and harm Coloradans, especially those with limited financial resources by enabling risky instances of borrowing by individuals struggling with addiction.
If enacted, the bill would have allowed casinos to extend lines of credit to players, essentially turning them into lenders. The bill did not specify interest rate caps but required a minimum loan amount of $1,000 and a repayment period of only 150 days.
Additionally, the bill stated that casinos would be responsible for paying taxes on earnings generated from unpaid credit. It also opened the possibility for casinos to pursue legal action for unpaid debts, raising legal, accounting and operational concerns.
Credit rating bill immediately opposes trustworthy gambling
Setting boundaries and implementing responsible practices, such as credit checks, no outstanding debt and the requirement to apply in advance are important steps in promoting responsible gambling. However, it is not in the best interest of casinos, which encourage responsible gambling, to encourage individuals to gamble irresponsibly.
There are concerns regarding whether individuals with a gambling disorder can truly provide meaningful consent to a financial transaction while caught up in a gambling spree, similar to the issues faced by individuals with substance use disorders who may not be able to provide informed consent while under the influence.
Colorado’s attempt to pass the bill appears to conflict with its efforts to address problem gambling, which include allocating $1 million in funding for responsible gaming projects. The state offers various resources to assist problem gamblers, including counseling, gambling addiction awareness programs and the option for individuals to self-exclude themselves from gambling.
However, it’s worth noting that there are other ways for gamblers to continue gambling, such as using ATMs within casinos after depleting their own funds. If they resort to credit, they have either reached their withdrawal limit or are accumulating gambling debt that can negatively impact their well-being and potentially lead to more significant issues.
Gambling with money one does not have is never a solution and can lead to detrimental consequences.
How has this charge made it a long way?
The decision of Colorado lawmakers to allow this measure to reach the governor’s desk despite its disadvantages may be attributed to a variety of factors. While the Senate passed the bill with a commanding vote of 25-8, indicating significant support, the initial vote in the House resulted in a narrow defeat of 34-31.
However, Representative Richard Holtorf called for a revote, which ultimately led to a slim margin of 33-32 in favor of the bill. This suggests that there were differing opinions and divisions among the representatives.
It is not uncommon for various interests and influences to be at play during the legislative process. Representative Jennifer Parenti and others have alleged the involvement of special interests in the decision-making process, implying that factors beyond the merits of the bill itself may have influenced its passage.
Ultimately, the dynamics and considerations within the legislative process can be complex and the passage of a bill does not always align with the perception of what may seem logical or beneficial.
Could negatively affect long run Colorado casinos legislation?
Although Governor Polis rejected the co-sponsored bill to expand credit in Colorado, the state remains gambling-friendly. In recent years, Colorado voters legalized sports betting and removed the previous $100 maximum bet limit for casinos and sportsbooks in Black Hawk, Central City and Cripple Creek.
Casino gambling is the next frontier, with states like Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Michigan generating significant tax revenue from iGaming.
The failure of the bill to expand credit should not hinder any future progress towards legalizing online casinos in Colorado. In fact, Representative Marc Snyder, one of the bill sponsors, has not ruled out the possibility of introducing another bill to allow credit specifically for out-of-state gamblers. However, this idea is still considered ill-advised.
Hill Kerby, an advocate for safe and legal betting who is enthusiastic about contributing to the industry’s growth. With a background in poker, sports, and psychology, Kerby brings a diverse perspective to his writing.
