South Dakota senators voted Wednesday to advance a constitutional amendment that would allow sports wagering by mobile and other electronic platforms statewide — as long as the bets run through a Deadwood-licensed casino and the system’s servers are located inside Deadwood city limits.
Supporters say South Dakotans already bet through offshore apps or by crossing state lines, and that a legal, regulated market could add consumer protections while keeping revenue in-state. Opponents argue it expands gambling and could deepen addiction and financial harm. The measure now heads to the House; if it clears the Legislature, voters would have the final say at the next general election.
The Senate passed Senate Joint Resolution 504 on a 23-10 vote, with two senators excused.
What the resolution would do
Under the resolution, mobile wagering would be tied to Deadwood’s existing constitutional authorization for limited gaming. The measure requires Deadwood casinos to offer or partner with electronic platforms with servers located within Deadwood.
It also directs the bulk of the state’s potential tax take toward property tax relief. The resolution states that ninety percent of mobile sports betting tax revenue will fund property tax relief.
Supporters: revenue is leaving the state
Sen. Casey Crabtree, R-Madison, the sponsor, argued the state is already losing money because South Dakotans can use apps or travel to neighboring states to place wagers.
“Right now, today, on this floor … I can use my phone, I can download an app, and I can bet,” Crabtree said.
Supporters also said legalization could add oversight and consumer protections that don’t exist when wagering happens through unregulated apps or illegal bookies.
Sen. Amber Hulse, R-Hot Springs, said legalization would not cure gambling addiction, but she argued regulation could create limits and accountability.
“For someone who has a personal connection to someone who is addicted to gambling, I would rather have people have guardrails on the betting limits and have it be regulated rather than it be on the black market or the revenue leavinSenate Gives Ok To Mobile Sports Bettingg our state,” Hulse said.
Opponents: gambling expansion, uncertain benefits
Opponents said the measure expands gambling and risks increasing harm, even if some betting already happens.
“This is clearly an expanding gambling bill,” said Sen. John Carley, R-Piedmont, during the floor debate.
Sen. Kevin Jensen, R-Canton, questioned whether new revenue would meaningfully reduce property taxes and said he was concerned the state would be collecting money off the backs of people who have an addiction. (5:49-5:53)
Sen. Greg Blanc, R-Rapid City, explained that his opposition stemmed from the impact he observed as a police chaplain.
“It’s difficult for my conscience to expand gambling in our state, and that’s why I’m gonna be a no on this bill,” Blanc said.
What happens next
SJR 504 now moves to the House for consideration. If lawmakers approve the resolution, it would go to voters at the next general election. If voters approve it, the Legislature would then set the rules for mobile sports wagering, including guardrails and any tax policy allowed under the measure.
