Efforts by Georgia lawmakers to legalize sports betting fizzle again
ATLANTA (AP) — It turns out 2025 isn't the year for legalized sports betting in Georgia.
Efforts to send a state constitutional amendment to voters failed Thursday in the state legislature, as neither the amendment nor a bill laying out details ever came to a vote in the House.
Voters in Missouri narrowly approved sports betting in a 2024 referendum, making it the 39th state to legalize the practice. But like in Georgia, legalization faces high hurdles in the 10 remaining states that bar sports gambling.
Thursday was the deadline for each Georgia chamber to pass its own legislation to the opposite chamber. The measures still could be revived in the last month of the session, but it much less likely. Lawmakers could still consider the measures in the 2026 half of Georgia's two-year session.
'It came in late and I guess people just weren't there yet,' said House Higher Education Committee Chairman Chuck Martin, an Alpharetta Republican, referring to a bill and constitutional amendment that were introduced only last week.
'We'll keep working with people and trying to do what's in the best interest of the state,' Martin said, saying a referendum was still possible in on the November 2026 ballot.
Sports wagering is backed by Atlanta's professional sports teams, business groups and Republican Lt. Gov Burt Jones. But those powerful proponents have struggled to pass a law in the seven legislative sessions since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018 struck down a federal law that banned commercial sports betting in most states.
In Minnesota, a proposal failed on a 6-6- tie vote in a Senate committee on Feb. 13, even though the sponsor said his bill was supported by the state's 11 Native American tribes, which operate casinos, the state's two horse racing tracks, charitable gambling operations and local sports teams.
California voters rejected wagering in 2022. A proposal to legalize sports betting passed the Texas House in 2023, but the state Senate spurned the proposal.
One state where the issue is making progress is Hawaii, where the state House on Tuesday passed a bill that would legalize online sports betting.
Missouri is currently making rules and taking applications from sportsbooks, with the launch of legal betting delayed until late summer or early fall.
Without Democratic votes in Georgia, a constitutional amendment couldn't achieve the two-thirds majorities needs to pass the state House and Senate.
Republicans in the state are far from unified. Some GOP lawmakers oppose sports betting, warning that legalizing sports betting will provide a pathway to addiction, especially for younger gamblers.
House Minority Whip Sam Park, a Lawrenceville Democrat, said Wednesday that his party wants to prioritize use of any tax money for prekindergarten. That was part of the constitutional amendment proposed by Martin's committee.
Supporters have argued that Georgians should get a chance to vote, arguing many already bet on sports illegally.
'I believe strongly — and Georgians by wide margins agree with me — that this change will not only bring in much needed revenue to educate our youngest learners but also provide consumer protections that don't exist in today's black market,' State Rep. Marcus Wiedower, the Watkinsville Republican who sponsored the measure, said in a statement
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
2 key findings on Democrats' brand problem from the new CNN poll
There's new evidence that the Democratic Party's reputation is in a bad place. That doesn't mean the party is doomed, electorally speaking. There's plenty of reason to doubt that, given lots of history and its performance in the 2025 elections thus far — but it is a complicating factor for the party's path forward. And a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS provides insights into the party's problems. It's worth a breakdown. The poll, which was released Sunday, asked a battery of questions about how people view both parties. Perhaps most striking was that people were more likely to view the Republicans than Democrats as the party with strong leaders (40% to 16%) and even the 'party of change' (32% to 25%). Neither party won close to a majority in either category. But the former is notable because there is such a gulf between the two parties. And the latter is notable because the party that's out of power is usually viewed as the party of change. Not this time. So what can we read into these findings? The 'strong leaders' question might be the most troublesome finding for Democrats. Only about 1 in 6 Americans said Democrats have stronger leaders than Republicans. As remarkably, only 39% of Democrats said that. We've seen hints of this in previous polls. A March CNN poll found about 3 in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters couldn't name a single leader who best reflected the party's core values. An AP-NORC poll last month showed just 35% of Democrats said they were at least 'somewhat' optimistic about the future of their party, compared with 55% of Republicans for their party. This might not seem too surprising. We just said goodbye to a Democratic president (Joe Biden) who was a diminished figure even when he was still in office. And the Democratic nominee who replaced him (Kamala Harris) wasn't exactly viewed as the future of the party when she took over the ticket in the 2024 race — and then lost. But there was a time when Democrats were at a somewhat similar crossroads, and the numbers weren't as dismal. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll asked the same question in 2006 — after John Kerry's unsuccessful emergence as Democrats' 2004 presidential candidate — and found a smaller 14-point advantage for Republicans. Back then, 63% of Democrats said their party had stronger leaders than Republicans — 24 points higher than today. One reason for the difference is that the 2025 and 2006 polls asked the question in a slightly different way, partly because one was conducted entirely by phone and the other mostly online. Today's poll gave people an explicit 'neither' option, which the 2006 poll didn't (though some people volunteered that option back then). Nearly half of Democrats in the new poll (48%) chose that option. That's still a remarkable finding. Combined with the 13% of Democrats who said Republicans have the stronger leaders, that's 6 in 10 Democrats this year who don't think their side has stronger leaders than a party led by a president whom a huge majority of them revile. The other notable finding is on which party is the 'party of change.' Americans chose Republicans, 32% to 25%. That's not a big gap, but it is counterintuitive given Republicans swept the House, Senate and White House last fall. Historically speaking, it's almost always the party that's out of power that's viewed as the party of change. Before the 2006 election, the same CNN-ORC poll mentioned above showed Democrats had a huge, 56% to 29% lead on this measure. Then, as now, Democrats didn't hold the presidency or either chamber of Congress. But the numbers are very different today. Not only do Democrats trail on this measure, but only a slight majority of Democrats themselves — 51% — say their party is the party of change. And only 18% of independents say that. It's likely this is, in part, about Democrats' failure to position themselves as change agents, but also about what President Donald Trump is doing — and about people not necessarily seeing 'change' as a good thing. However you feel about the changes Trump is making, there is no question he is pushing lots of them. You see that in his and the Department of Government Efficiency's rapid overhaul of the federal government and in Trump's historic efforts to expand executive power — in ways that are often being halted by the courts because they go too far, too fast. It's possible that people just see Trump changing lots of things, whether for good or ill in their opinions, so the 'party of change' mantle doesn't mean what it usually does. We already saw during the 2024 campaign that people's definitions of 'change' were somewhat jumbled by unusual circumstances — i.e., Harris replacing Biden, and a former president running as the challenger. But it's also pretty clear that Democrats have failed to make themselves into a viable and attractive alternative to the party in power. The new CNN poll also asked which party people viewed as the 'party that can get things done.' Republicans led on this by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, 36% to 19%. Only 49% of Democrats and 11% of independents picked the Democratic Party as the more formidable one. There's also, of course, Republicans' big edge on the 'strong leaders' question. None of this means Democrats are sunk in the 2026 elections — or anything close to it. History shows the party that doesn't hold the White House almost always wins midterm elections, in large part because they're viewed as a check on the president. Democrats and liberal candidates have also been doing well in special elections and other races held since the 2024 election. In other words, being not-Trump could be good enough to at least reclaim a very closely split House. But if the Democratic Party wants to run up the score in 2026 and really chart a path for the 2028 election, it has some real work to do on its branding.
Hamilton Spectator
30 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Mexico's ruling party headed toward control of newly elected Supreme Court, vote tallies show
MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico's ruling Morena party appeared to be heading toward control over the Supreme Court, preliminary vote tallies of the country's first judicial election indicated. While votes were still being counted for the majority of the 2,600 federal, state and local judge positions up for grabs in Sunday's judicial elections, results rolled in for the nine Supreme Court positions. The majority of the newly elected justices share strong ties and ideological alignments with the ruling party, shifting a once fairly balanced high court into the hands of the very party that overhauled the judicial system to elect judges for the first time. Experts warned the shift would undercut checks and balances in the Latin American nation: The governing party would now be close to controlling all three branches of government, and President Claudia Sheinbaum and her party also would have a easier path to push through their agenda. 'We're watching as power is falling almost entirely into the hands of one party,' said Georgina De la Fuente, election specialist with the Mexican consulting firm Strategia Electoral. 'There isn't any balance of power.' A Morena-leaning court and an Indigenous justice Some of those headed toward election were members or former members of the party. A number of them, who were Supreme Court justices prior to the election, were appointed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Sheinbaum's mentor who pushed through the judicial overhaul last year. Others were advisers to the president or the party or campaigned with politically aligned visions for the judiciary. Not all of the prospective winners were explicitly aligned with Morena. One standout was Hugo Aguilar Ortiz, an Indigenous lawyer from the southern state of Oaxaca. He has no clear party affiliation, though Sheinbaum said repeatedly she hoped to have an Indigenous judge on the court. A political controversy That Morena would emerge from the election with control of the judiciary was what critics had feared . The vote came after months of fierce debate, prompted when López Obrador and the party jammed through the reforms for judges to be elected instead of being appointed based on merits. The overhaul will notably limit the Supreme Court as a counterweight to the president. Critics say the judicial reform was an attempt to take advantage of high popularity levels to stack courts in favor of the party. Sheinbaum and her mentor have insisted that electing judges will root out corruption in a system most Mexicans agree is broken. 'Whoever says that there is authoritarianism in Mexico is lying,' Sheinbaum said during the vote. 'Mexico is a country that is only becoming more free, just and democratic because that is the will of the people.' The elections were marred by low participation — about 13% — and confusion by voters who struggled to understand the new voting system, something opponents quickly latched onto as a failure. De la Fuente said Morena is likely to use its new lack of counterweight in the high court to push through rounds of reforms, including electoral changes. Late Monday, more than 85% of the ballots had been tallied and counting was to continue overnight. The leading Supreme Court candidates — Hugo Aguilar Ortiz was the big surprise from the election. The Indigenous lawyer led all vote-getters, including several sitting Supreme Court justices. He's known as a legal activist fighting for the rights of Indigenous Mexicans and has criticized corruption in the judiciary. — Lenia Batres was already a Supreme Court justice and was appointed by López Obrador. Previously a congresswoman, she's a member of Morena and clearly an ally of Mexico's president. — Yasmín Esquivel is a Supreme Court justice who was appointed by López Obrador. She focused her campaign on modernizing the justice system and has pushed for gender equality. She was at the center of a 2022 controversy when she was accused of plagiarizing her thesis. She is considered an ally of the Morena party. — Loretta Ortiz is a justice on the Supreme Court who was appointed by López Obrador. She also served in Congress and resigned from Morena in 2018 in a show of independence as a judge. Despite that, she's considered an ally of the party. — María Estela Ríos González is a lawyer who acted as legal adviser to López Obrador, first when he was mayor of Mexico City and later when he became president. She has a long history as a public servant and work in labor law and on a number of Indigenous issues. — Giovanni Figueroa Mejía is a lawyer from the Pacific coast state of Nayarit with a doctorate in constitutional law. He currently works as an academic at the Iberoamericana University in Mexico City. He's worked in human rights. While he holds no clear party affiliation, he supported the judicial overhaul pushed forward by Morena, saying in an interview with his university that the overhaul 'was urgent and necessary in order to rebuild' the judiciary. He said some of his work in constitutional law was cited in justifying the reform. — Irving Espinosa Betanzo is a magistrate on Mexico City's Supreme Court and has previously worked as a congressional adviser to Morena. He campaigned for the country's highest court on a platform of eliminating nepotism and corruption and pushing for human rights. — Arístides Rodrigo Guerrero García is a law professor pushing for social welfare with no experience as a judge, but who has worked as a public servant and has experience in both constitutional and parliamentary law. He gained traction in campaigns for a social media video of him claiming he's 'more prepared than a pork rind.' — Sara Irene Herrerías Guerra is a prosecutor specializing in human rights for Mexico's Attorney General's Office. She's worked on issues like gender equality, sexually transmitted infections and human trafficking. In 2023, she worked on the investigation of a fire in an immigration facility in the border city of Ciudad Juárez that killed 40 migrants. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Hamilton Spectator
30 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Shigeo Nagashima, known in Japan as ‘Mr. Pro Baseball,' dies at 89
TOKYO (AP) — Shigeo Nagashima, who was known in Japan as 'Mr. Pro Baseball' and was one of the most famous people in the country during his playing days, has died. He was 89. His death was confirmed Tuesday by the Yomiuri Giants, the team he helped make famous and eventually managed. His passing was also announced in special extra editions of newspapers that are handed out on street corners — a throwback to breaking news in an earlier time. He was famous in a period before Japanese players like Ichiro Suzuki and Shohei Ohtani began to star in North American MLB. Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi said Nagashima 'gave bright dreams and hopes to the society.' Nagashima helped lead the Giants as they won nine straight Japan Series titles — the counterpart to the World Series — from 1965 through 1973. His equally famous teammate was Sadaharu Oh, who hit 868 home runs in his career. Nagashima played third base, finished with a .305 batting average, had 2,471 hits, 1,522 RBIs and 444 home runs. He played for 17 seasons and retired in 1974, then returned to manage the Giants in 1975 through 1980. He was fired after the 1980 season when the Giants failed to win the Japan Series during his stint. He returned to the dugout in 1993 and led the Giants to the Japan Series title in 1994 with Hideki Matsui, who eventually joined the New York Yankees. He also won the championship in 2000. He was to set to manage Japan in the 2004 Athens Olympics, but had a stroke a few months before that left him partially paralyzed and unable to participate. ___ AP MLB: Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
