Skip to main content

Proposition DD: Let the Bets Flow


On November 5th, 2019, one of the two measures placed on the ballot in Colorado was Proposition DD, giving the electorate a referendum on the legality of sports betting within the state; it also would impose a tax upon the net revenue of those establishments accepting such bets, the majority of which would provide funding for the Colorado Water Plan and the remainder of which would be used to regulate sports betting and provide services for gambling addiction.

Since 1992, gambling on the outcome of most sporting events had been outlawed nationally under the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, or PASPA, though with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, this Act was deemed unconstitutional, and state legislatures became free to legislate regarding sports betting and its legality. Proposition DD was put to a public ballot under the provisions of the TABOR amendment to the Colorado Constitution, a ‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights’ limiting the spending of the Colorado State Government, as it contained a new tax upon sports betting, one which requires approval from voters.


The passing of the proposal made Colorado only the nineteenth state to legalize gambling on sporting events, and it will, from May 2020, allow casino operators to apply for licenses to run online sportsbooks, through mobile apps and websites, the revenue from which will be taxed. Predominant arguments in favor of the proposition stated that it would have the ability to provide up to $29 million in revenue for the state from taxation of revenue, though the Blue Book produced to advise voters predicts a roughly $16 million per annum taking over the first five years. Colorado is a state with great pressure placed upon its water resources, and the Colorado Water Plan, released in 2015, outlines the ways in which the state might be able to address its needs for the future. The projected monies to be directed to water projects would amount to just below $15 million per year for the Plan, excluding regulatory set-up costs, according to Blue Book statistics, as illustrated below.



The Denver Post mentions that the language of the question might have explained the close result in the ballot, and also states that there could be moral grounds on which one might object to the change in the law, as the vice of recreational gambling has been known to easily turn to addiction. A further objection one might consequently draw is that with the growth of the potential sports betting market, addiction service funding, as shown above, is not set to increase proportionately, or at all. Proposition DD has not, despite its passing, legalized all kinds of sports betting that can be seen elsewhere, such as the notable restriction regarding in-play betting on collegiate sports, which allows gamblers the ability to place wagers on events that unfold throughout the game, including performance statistics. This restriction will not allay the concerns of many however, as it does not extend to all sports, merely those at a college level.

It does appear that despite attempts to portray Proposition DD as merely a method of revenue-raising for water initiatives, this has been seen as a simple side-benefit of the measure, rather than its purpose. The overwhelming majority of funding for the ‘Yes’ campaign came from the gaming industry. 9News reports that of the $1.26 million donated to the ‘Yes’ campaign up to October 9th, 98% had been donated by the gaming industry; those set to reap the benefit of this new market opening. Voters are not blind to this unsurprising fact, though many are indifferent and have supported this measure as a means of avoiding tax rises in the near future.


Sources:


Zelinger, M. (2019, October 21). What is Proposition DD on Colorado’s ballots?. 9News. Accessed 12/04/2019 <https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/colorado-proposition-dd/73-5bbaeeb3-33c4-4ad3-bd65-486e699a19b0>

Hindi, S. (2019, November 6). Colorado Prop DD, the sports betting measure, narrowly passes. The Denver Post. Accessed 12/04/2019 <https://www.denverpost.com/2019/11/06/colorado-proposition-dd-results-sports-betting/>

Panja, T. (2018, May 14). Is Britain the Future of U.S. Sports Betting?. The New York Times. Accessed 12/04/2019 <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/sports/sports-betting-england.html>

http://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/images/lcs/2019_blue_book_english_for_web.pdf

Comments

  1. Brennan LittleDecember 9, 2019 at 2:46 PM

    R.C.,

    This is definitely an interesting topic. I feel like sports betting is actually favored throughout the majority of the general public, so I was pretty surprised at first when I read that 98% of the donations to the "Yes" campaign came through the gaming industry. Then after thinking about it for a second, I was no longer surprised; big industries will give tons of money to something that will turn to benefit for them.

    I am still pretty shocked that the addiction service funding will not increase proportionately or at all though. It seems like they advertised that for those that may object the bill for the moral aspect of gambling, but if there is going to be no legitimate change in action with it, thats pretty messed up.

    I haven't looked into this very much, but after this article I am definitely more interested in it. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. GraceCDecember 11, 2019 at 4:00 PM

    Yeah I think the addiction service funding part is disturbing because I know that around 6 million adults have a gambling problem, which is only 3% of Americans, but that is because only 15% of Americans gamble at least once a week. Now that is legal and people have greater access, I'm scared how much it is going to increase since they admit to not increasing funding for services.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TABOR and Colorado Politics Post-CC

       One of the more contentious topics within Colorado politics is budgeting and funding for projects, education, and revenue intake. This came to a head in this year's election with Proposition CC. Despite failing at the ballot box, the Democratic Party is pushing ahead with the 2020 legislative agenda that includes drafts to eliminate the Tax Payer's Bill of Rights or amend it to ensure more accessible revenue for the party's policy objectives. What is critical to the debate is the increasing partisan divide within Colorado, the historical shift from Republican control to Democrat trifectas in state government, and the institutional mechanisms that have hampered strategy for the dominant party. Also, in the mix are interest groups that influence local politics which can help uncover party strategy from another perspective.        The Colorado Fiscal Institute (CFI) a left-leaning think tank, is a key player in this battle, authoring s everal...
6 comments
Read more

Colorado Legislation and Arms Limitations

The Columbine High School shooting that took place in 1999 claimed the lives of 15 people and wounded 28. Since then the topic of gun control has sparked debates supporting both sides of the argument and from state to state the laws of carrying differs. As of now, a very brief summary of Colorado state law concerning personal arm restrictions are: "Colorado law also allows a person to possess a handgun in a dwelling, place of business, or automobile. However, when you carry the weapon into your home, business, hotel room, etc. it must be in plain view" (colorado.gov). And according to the National Rifle Association for Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), in Colorado, there is no Permit to Purchase required for a rifle, shotgun or handgun. There is no required Registration of Firearms for rifles, shotguns or handguns. There is no Licensing of Owner for rifles, shotguns or handguns, and there is no permit to carry rifles or shotguns, however, a permit to carry is requi...
4 comments
Read more

Insulin cap in Colorado

In the United States, the topic of medication prices has increased substantially, specifically insulin. Insulin is a medication used to treat type one Diabetes which typically costs a thousand dollars or more depending on how much you need, and how much your insurance is willing to pay. Colorado changed this with a bill designed to put a cap on the copay for insulin. The bill HB19-1216 was signed into law by Governor Jared Polis in May of 2019. This bill states that “a carrier that provides coverage for prescription insulin drugs pursuant to the terms of a health coverage plan the carrier offers shall cap the total amount that a covered person is required to pay for a covered prescription insulin drug at an amount not to exceed one hundred dollars per thirty-day supply of insulin, regardless of the amount of type of insulin needed to fill the covered person’s prescription.” This bill will go into effect on January 1st, 2020 and will be overseen by the department of law who will investi...
7 comments
Read more