What if Californians pass two sports betting initiatives?

in summary

There is a good chance that two initiatives to legalize sports betting will appear in the November polls. If both are passed, both may take effect or the outcome could be decided in court, depending on which person gets the most yes votes.

By November, Californians will likely face the question: Should sports betting be legalized?

And then, a little after their polls, there’s a good chance they’ll be asked again: Should sports betting be legalized?

yes. Chances are that two measures to legalize sports betting will appear in the November ballot. This was scaled back earlier this year, when four different initiatives were underway.

Of the two remaining measures, one is already eligible for the November ballot, and the other is expected soon.

Here’s what each initiative does

A group of Native American tribes supports the “California Sports Betting and Illicit Gambling Law Enforcement Act” and is currently eligible to vote. Tribal casinos and the state’s four horse racing tracks will be allowed to offer sports betting. It will also allow tribal casinos to expand their gambling offerings to include games of roulette and dice.

Meanwhile, the California Homelessness and Mental Health Solutions Act is backed by several large sports betting companies, including FanDuel, DraftKings and BetMGM. It would legalize online sports betting outside Native American lands, and allow gaming companies to offer online sports betting if they partnered with a tribe. Election officials are reviewing signatures for this initiative—if enough are correct, they will also be eligible to vote.

interactive drawing

Download the interactive drawing

Here’s what happens if they both succeed

California sometimes ends up with ballot papers containing multiple initiatives on the same topic.

If one succeeds and the others don’t, there is no problem: the pass that passes takes effect and some does not.

If they all go through and don’t conflict with each other, they can all come into play.

But if more than one succeeds, they are be In conflict with each other, the one passed by a higher margin than the “yes” vote goes into effect and the one that doesn’t, according to the California constitution.

The initiative, backed by FanDduel, DraftKkings and BetMGM, stresses that it does not conflict with the measure allowing sports betting on tribal lands, and that if both are successful, both will take effect. The measure supported by the tribes says nothing about whether it conflicts with other measures.

So, if both initiatives are passed – And the Ian Emrich, a Southern California attorney whose practice includes gaming law, said the initiative backed by FanDuel and DraftKings is passing by a higher margin — odds are that both measures will take effect. But if the pre-procedure is passed and the pre-procedure is passed by a higher margin, the pre-procedure attorneys can argue in court that the two-procedure be In conflict, to try to prevent the action backed by FanDuel and DraftKings from going into effect.

Other Ballot Duplications

This is not the first time that more than one initiative has been launched on the same topic. In 2016, there were two initiatives related to the death penalty and two initiatives around plastic bags.

Lawmakers can also broker deals between supporters of the initiative. In 2014, lawmakers passed a bill that would allow his supporters to remove their actions from the ballot as the election date approaches, giving them more time to reach an agreement. In April, for example, lawmakers negotiated a deal between patient groups, consumer attorneys and medical professionals, to pass a law that increases penalties that victims of medical malpractice can seek and avoid a costly initiative battle over the subject.

In February, when there were four sports betting initiatives in the mix, state legislative leaders Anthony Rendon and Tony Atkins expressed an interest in seeking a compromise on sports betting.

“I think it’s always confusing to voters when there are multiple ballots on the same item,” Senate Leader Tony Atkins, a San Diego Democrat, said at the Sacramento Press Club event. “If you want to see progress, it pays to be simpler, so I think maybe there will be an opportunity[to negotiate a deal],” Atkins said.

When CalMatters asked Atkins’ office if legislative leaders were still considering a deal, their spokesperson said they were still looking into the matter.

Learn more about the lawmakers mentioned in this story

State Senate, District 39 (San Diego)

How did you vote 2019-2020

liberal
governor

Area 39 Demographics

Ethnicity / Ethnicity

Latin

19%

white

56%

Asia

16%

black

5%

multiracial

4%

voter registration

dim

44%

the Republican Party

23%

There is no party

27%

else

4%

Campaign contributions

At least Senator Tony Atkins took over
$1.8 million
From the work
sector since her election to the Legislative Council. This represents
20%
of her total campaign contributions.

State Assembly, District 63 (South Gate)

How did 2019-2020 sound

liberal
governor

63 . District Demographics

Ethnicity / Ethnicity

Latin

76%

white

10%

Asia

6%

black

7%

multiracial

1%

voter registration

dim

56%

the Republican Party

14%

There is no party

24%

else

6%

Campaign contributions

Noun. At least Anthony Rendon has taken over
$2.8 million
From the work
sector since his election to the Legislative Council. This represents
27%
of his total campaign contributions.

How do Californians feel?

The vast majority of Californians believe the initiative process needs to change, according to a survey conducted by the California Public Policy Institute in April. More than 90% of Caliorney residents agreed somewhat or strongly that the wording of polling procedures is often too confusing for voters to understand what happens if the initiative is passed, and 56% said special interests control much of the process.

Most initiatives don’t pass, and Mark Baldassar, the institute’s president, said the probability of passing the measure drops further if voters confuse it.

said Mary Beth Moylan, associate dean at the University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law.

“People tend not to read things very closely. Too often, it can be argued that what is in the poll title is misleading.” “So this is especially dangerous in situations where you have multiple initiatives on the same or similar topic.”

Leave a Comment