On November 8, voters in California dealt a blow to the proposed legalization of sports betting in the state. The contentious ballot featured two initiatives: Proposition 26, backed by Native American tribal governments, and Proposition 27, supported by commercial entities like DraftKings and FanDuel. Despite a record-breaking campaign budget of $500 million, both proposals failed to pass, leaving California’s sports betting landscape in limbo.
The Costly Battle: A Half-Billion Dollar Campaign
The California sports betting legalization campaign proved to be the most expensive yet, with a staggering $500 million spent by various stakeholders. This figure highlights the intense competition and interest surrounding the potential opening of the sports betting market in the state.
Proposition 26: Tribal Casinos Seek Inclusion
Proposition 26, championed by California’s Native American tribal governments, aimed to legalize sports betting exclusively at tribal casinos. The initiative also sought to expand the offerings at these casinos to include craps and roulette. However, the provision allowing individuals to bring civil lawsuits against card clubs over gaming disputes raised concerns among card room operators, leading to opposition from this sector.
Proposition 27: Online and Mobile Sports Betting on the Table
Proposition 27, backed by sports betting giants DraftKings and FanDuel, sought to legalize online and mobile sports betting in California. Major players in the U.S. market since the Supreme Court overturned the federal ban on sports wagering in 2018, these companies saw an opportunity to capitalize on California’s large population. However, the proposition faced opposition from Native American tribes and Governor Gavin Newsom, who deemed it unfavorable for the state.
Divisions Within the Parties
Interestingly, the campaign witnessed a split within the political landscape. In a rare show of bipartisanship, both the Democratic and Republican parties opposed Proposition 27, further complicating its chances of success. Additionally, Major League Baseball (MLB) expressed support for Proposition 27, adding another layer of complexity to the debate.
Governor Gavin Newsom’s Stance
Governor Gavin Newsom played a pivotal role in the campaign, firmly standing against Proposition 27. He argued that the initiative would have adverse effects on California, highlighting potential drawbacks that could impact the state’s social and economic landscape.
The failure of both Proposition 26 and Proposition 27 marked a significant moment in California’s sports betting journey. With tribal-backed and commercial-supported initiatives unable to gain voter approval, the path to legalized sports betting in the state remains uncertain. Despite a record-breaking budget, the complexities of the proposals, coupled with opposition from different sectors, proved insurmountable. As the landscape of sports betting continues to evolve in the United States, California will likely reassess its approach to the contentious issue in the future.