California Legislative Leadership Opposes Prop 27, an Online Sports Betting Ballot Measure

California’s legislative leadership — which includes the Democratic and Republican chiefs in the Senate and Assembly — found some common ground this week as they collectively came out against a ballot measure that would legalize online and mobile sports wagering. 

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Senate President Pro Tempore Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, Senate Minority Leader Scott Wilk, R-Santa Clarita, Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood, and Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher, R-Yuba City, announced their opposition to Proposition 27 this week. 

The legislative leaders cited a concern for revenue benefiting out-of-state entities rather than tribes should the measure pass. 

“California’s tribes have proven to be safe and responsible operators of gaming in California, providing benefits to their communities and to their members,” Atkins said. 

“Prop 27 eliminates the sovereign right of California tribes to operate gaming in California,” said Wilk. “They have proven to be excellent stewards of this responsibility.” 

Prop 27 would legalize online and mobile sports betting for individuals in California who are at least 21 years old, offered by federally recognized tribes and “eligible businesses that contract with them.” The ballot language stipulates tax and licensing revenues would be directed to homelessness programs and nonparticipating tribes. 

The ballot measure “will allow every tribe — not just those with big casinos close to big cities — a chance to directly benefit from online sports betting in California,” Jose “Moke” Simon, chairman of the Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians and a member of the Yes on 27 campaign, has said. “The measure puts tribes firmly in control of online sports betting in California.” 

Prop 27 is expected to increase state revenues “possibly in the hundreds of millions of dollars” but isn’t likely to exceed $500 million per year, according to the legislative analyst’s estimate.

But critics have maintained the measure, backed by industry heavyweights like DraftKings and FanDuel, would really benefit the out-of-state gaming companies. There is also concern that it could expose children or teenagers to gambling addictions without proper safeguards in place. 

Prop 27 is not the only sports wagering measure before voters in November. The other, Prop 26, would legalize sports betting at tribal casinos and certain horse racing tracks, including Santa Anita Park and Los Alamitos Race Course. 

Earlier this month, the California-Hawaii NAACP filed a lawsuit asking for an opposition statement attributed to a member of the organization’s Los Angeles branch to be stricken from Prop 26 ballot materials, alleging it is “false and/or misleading” since it does support the measure. The No on 26 group quickly agreed to remove the statement. 

The Secretary of State’s Office’s official voter information guide is under public scrutiny until Monday, Aug. 15. 

A statewide ballot measure would need to be approved by a majority vote to be enacted.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register


  1. Vote against both measures, is my advice.

  2. UpChuck.Liberals says

    Frankly the ads they’ve been running have a hint of BS to them, whenever some ad says how much money will be going to education you know it’s generally nonsense. Just like the lottery money and the money from the THC laden MaryJane never quite made it to the worthless Teachers Unions or the kids.

  3. DITTO……in fact I’ve voted NO for almost every measure for the last 50 years because they’re mostly based on the left’s lies, and gets Kommiefornia into more and more debt, and gives more and more power to the government. I did vote on the measure that was against giving the homos more power (I think it was Prop 8)……of course, it lost. And then they wonder why all the SANE people are leaving the state!!

  4. Yup, I always vote NO!

Speak Your Mind