Alabama senator to introduce bill on gambling legalisation

• Senator Merika Coleman to introduce legislation enabling statewide vote on constitutional amendment.
• Bill would authorise the governor to establish a gambling commission and regulate lottery, gaming and sports betting.
• A constitutional amendment must receive three-fifths approval in both legislative chambers before ballot placement.

Alabama State Senator Merika Coleman announced plans to introduce legislation next week that would allow voters to decide whether gambling should be legalized in the state.

The proposal would authorise a statewide vote on a constitutional amendment permitting the governor to establish a gambling commission and enabling lawmakers to draft legislation to regulate a lottery, gaming and sports betting.

“Is this something that you want to do — yes or no?” said Coleman, D-Birmingham.

Restarting stalled conversations

The proposed legislation aims to restart a conversation that has struggled to advance in the Alabama Legislature for years.

“This bill simply gives us the ability to come back and actually establish gaming in the state of Alabama. It’s not just the lottery, it’s gaming, it’s sports betting, it’s all of the stuff that folks are talking about,” Coleman told AL.com.

Comprehensive gambling legislation in 2024 passed the House with 70 votes but failed in the Senate by a single vote. That bill had included provisions for a lottery, casinos, sports betting, a compact with the Poarch Band of Creek Indians and the creation of a gambling commission.

State Sen. Greg Albritton, R-Atmore, a previous sponsor of gambling legislation, voted against the measure.

Constitutional requirements

Alabama’s Constitution prohibits lotteries, so any effort to authorise one or to expand legal gambling requires a constitutional amendment. Such an amendment must be approved by three-fifths of both legislative chambers, meaning 21 of 35 senators and 63 of 105 representatives, before it can be placed on the ballot.

The last time Alabama voters considered a gambling-related constitutional amendment was in 1999, when a lottery proposal was defeated by a margin of 54% to 46%.

Public demand cited

Although gambling was not initially expected to return to the legislative agenda this session due to the election year, Coleman decided to take the initiative.

“Everywhere I go, people are asking, are we going to take this issue up?” she said. “Since nobody else is talking about it, I said, ‘Why not me?'”

Gov. Kay Ivey has previously supported bringing a comprehensive gambling proposal to the public. Five years ago, she commissioned a study that concluded the state could benefit financially from legalised gambling.

“All of this gaming money is now going across the borders,” said Coleman, who also serves on the Budget Committee.

She pointed to widespread participation by Alabamians in gambling activities in neighbouring states.

Budget pressures mount

Coleman cited future budget pressures as a key reason to revisit the issue. These include potential federal funding cuts tied to legislation signed into law by President Donald Trump.

“We have some major deficits coming at us,” she said. “And we’re going to have to figure out where in the world this revenue will come from — ’27 is going to be hard, but ’28 is going to be doggone near impossible if we don’t have some type of new revenue.”

The senator’s assessment reflects growing concerns about Alabama’s fiscal position. State budgets face pressure from multiple sources, including education funding, healthcare costs and infrastructure needs.

Revenue potential

The economic argument for legalised gambling centres on revenue that currently flows to neighbouring states. Alabama residents regularly cross state lines to participate in lottery games, casino gaming and sports betting in jurisdictions where these activities are legal.

Studies commissioned by state officials have projected substantial revenue potential from a regulated gambling market. These projections typically include lottery ticket sales, casino gaming taxes and sports betting levies.

The 2024 legislation that nearly passed the Senate represented the most comprehensive gambling proposal in Alabama’s recent history. Its narrow defeat by a single vote demonstrated both the potential for passage and the political challenges involved.

Next steps

Coleman’s bill would not directly legalise gambling. Instead, it would create a framework for future legalisation by enabling a public vote and establishing the governmental infrastructure needed to regulate the industry.

If the constitutional amendment reaches the ballot and wins voter approval, the legislature would then need to pass enabling legislation detailing specific regulations, tax rates, licensing requirements and other operational matters.

The proposed gambling commission would oversee all aspects of the regulated market. This would include issuing licences, establishing technical standards, ensuring compliance and collecting taxes.

The compact with the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, which was part of the 2024 proposal, would require separate negotiations. The tribe operates several gaming facilities in Alabama under federal law and would likely play a major role in any expanded gambling market.

Regional context

Alabama remains one of the few states in the region without a lottery or legalised casino gaming. Most neighbouring states have established regulated gambling markets that generate substantial revenue for public services.

The growth of sports betting nationwide has added urgency to gambling debates in states that have not yet legalised the activity. Online sports betting, in particular, has proven popular in states that have authorised it, generating tax revenue that some lawmakers view as too valuable to ignore.

Coleman’s initiative seeks to address both the immediate political challenge of advancing gambling legislation and the longer-term question of how Alabama will fund government services in an era of fiscal constraint.

The senator’s decision to proceed despite the election year context suggests confidence that public support exists for at least allowing voters to decide the issue.