General Affairs Committee
March 10, 2025
Committee Chair: Sen. Rick Holdcroft | Bills Heard: 7 | Full Transcript (PDF)
LR20CA: Constitutional amendment to authorize online mobile sports betting in Nebraska
Introduced by: Sen. Eliot Bostar | Testimony: 6 proponents, 7 opponents, 2 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
Nebraska lawmakers heard competing visions of online sports betting as a revenue solution and a public health threat. Sen. Eliot Bostar's constitutional amendment would authorize mobile sports wagering tied to existing casinos, with revenues dedicated to property tax relief. Bostar cited data showing 83,000 Nebraskans have active accounts and $32 million in annual tax revenue currently flows to Iowa.
Why it matters: Nebraska is losing substantial tax revenue to neighboring states while residents already gamble online. But opponents warn legalization increases problem gambling and exploits vulnerable populations—a concern backed by research from other states.
What they're saying: - Proponents: "Nebraskans are already doing this. We should regulate it and capture the revenue," said Lance Morgan of WarHorse Gaming. Regulated platforms provide consumer protections absent in illegal offshore sites. - Opponents: "The house always wins, and for the house to win, it's the people of Nebraska who have to lose," said Nate Grasz of Nebraska Family Alliance. Les Bernal of Stop Predatory Gambling noted that 70% of online gambling profits come from just 0.5% of users—the most addicted.
By the numbers: 83,000 active Nebraska accounts during 2024-2025 football season; 92% of border crossings went to Iowa; estimated $32 million in annual tax revenue at stake; 96% of online gambling accounts lose money.
What's next: No vote was taken. The committee will consider whether to advance the constitutional amendment.
Committee sentiment: Skeptical: Sen. Bob Andersen, Sen. Jared Storm Unclear: Sen. Stan Clouse, Sen. Barry DeKay, Sen. Victor Rountree
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB421: Regulatory framework for online sports betting in Nebraska
Introduced by: Sen. Stan Clouse | Testimony: 5 proponents, 4 opponents, 4 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
The committee heard a regulatory framework for online sports betting that hinges on voter approval of a constitutional amendment—but faces questions about whether the Legislature can legally pass it first. LB421 establishes how online sports betting would operate in Nebraska, with 90% of tax revenue directed to property tax relief and the remainder split among the Racing and Gaming Commission and problem gambling assistance.
Why it matters: If voters approve online sports betting, Nebraska needs clear rules. But opponents argue the Legislature is putting the cart before the horse by passing enacting legislation before the constitutional amendment passes—reversing the process used for casino gambling in 2020.
What they're saying: - Proponents: "This provides the necessary framework if the amendment passes, preventing the industry from writing its own rules," said Lance Morgan of WarHorse Gaming. Competitive markets work: Colorado has 33 licenses and generates substantial revenue. - Opponents: "This is unconstitutional. We passed enacting legislation after the 2020 amendment, not before," said Nate Grasz of Nebraska Family Alliance. Glen Andersen calculated that of $160 million in losses, only $32 million becomes tax revenue while $120 million leaves the state.
By the numbers: 90% of revenue to property tax relief; 3% to problem gambling assistance; estimated $2-3 million annual revenue from fantasy sports alone; demand for gambling addiction treatment has doubled.
What's next: No vote was taken. The committee may consider amendments to the revenue allocation and address constitutional concerns.
Committee sentiment: Supportive: Sen. Stan Clouse Skeptical: Sen. Bob Andersen Unclear: Sen. Barry DeKay, Sen. Victor Rountree
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB438: Legalization and regulation of online sports betting under Racing and Gaming Commission oversight
Introduced by: Sen. Ashlei Spivey | Testimony: 0 proponents, 3 opponents, 0 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
Sen. Ashlei Spivey introduced a bill to legalize online sports betting without a constitutional amendment, but opponents argue it exceeds voter-approved authority. LB438 would allow licensed racetracks to offer online sports betting through authorized platforms, generating revenue for property tax relief, the General Fund, and the Education Future Fund. Spivey's counsel determined it operates within the 2020 voter-approved gaming framework.
Why it matters: The bill offers a faster path to online sports betting than waiting for a constitutional amendment vote in 2026. But opponents contend it expands gambling beyond what voters approved and should require constitutional authorization like LR20CA.
What they're saying: - Proponent: "People are already gambling online and crossing into Iowa. We should capture that revenue for essential services," said Spivey, noting she can see the Iowa bridge from her home in Ponca Hills. - Opponents: "Voters did not approve online sports wagering in 2020. This requires a constitutional amendment," said Nate Grasz of Nebraska Family Alliance. Glen Andersen cited a personal example of a 21-year-old accumulating $4,000 in gambling debt.
By the numbers: Estimated $30 million in annual tax revenue; 83,000 Nebraskans with active accounts; 92% of border crossings go to Iowa.
What's next: No vote was taken. The committee will determine whether the bill requires a constitutional amendment.
Committee sentiment: Supportive: Sen. Ashlei Spivey Unclear: Sen. Rick Holdcroft
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB63: Removal of restrictions on sports wagering for in-state collegiate teams
Introduced by: Sen. Tom Brandt | Testimony: 1 proponents, 3 opponents, 0 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
Sen. Tom Brandt seeks to remove restrictions on betting for in-state college teams, but an NCAA study on athlete harassment complicates the case. LB63 would allow wagering on Nebraska and other in-state college teams when they play at home, eliminating what Brandt calls an inconsistent rule that drives bettors to unregulated platforms.
Why it matters: The bill highlights a tension between revenue generation and athlete protection. An NCAA study found that abuse by angry sports bettors is one of the most common types of harassment college athletes receive, including racism, sexual abuse, and death threats.
What they're saying: - Proponent: "The current rule is inconsistent and doesn't prevent gambling—it just drives it offshore," said Brandt. Lynne McNally of WarHorse Gaming noted that NIL payments eliminate concerns about student-athlete pressure to throw games. - Opponents: "The NCAA is asking states to do more to protect student athletes, not less," said Nate Grasz of Nebraska Family Alliance. An NCAA study found harassment by angry bettors makes up at least 12% of publicly-posted social media abuse, with messages including racism, sexual abuse, and death threats.
By the numbers: LB561 (2021) passed with strong bipartisan support, with only 4 senators voting against the restriction; at least a dozen other states prohibit betting on in-state college teams playing in-state; estimated 25% increase in sports betting if restriction removed.
What's next: No vote was taken. The committee will weigh athlete protection against revenue and consistency arguments.
Committee sentiment: Supportive: Sen. Tom Brandt Unclear: Sen. Jared Storm, Sen. Victor Rountree
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB342: Regulatory framework and tax structure for fantasy sports contests in Nebraska
Introduced by: Sen. Tom Brandt | Testimony: 3 proponents, 2 opponents, 1 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
Sen. Tom Brandt introduced a bill to regulate fantasy sports contests already being played by Nebraskans, but opponents argue it's a Trojan horse for online gambling expansion. LB342 distinguishes fantasy sports (skill-based) from sports betting (chance-based) and would require operators to obtain licenses, implement consumer protections, and pay taxes estimated at $2-3 million annually.
Why it matters: Fantasy sports are already widespread in Nebraska. The bill offers a regulatory framework and consumer protections—but opponents worry it legitimizes an industry designed to convert casual players into regular gamblers and positions companies for future online sports betting market share.
What they're saying: - Proponents: "Fantasy sports have been played for decades. This simply regulates existing activity," said Brandt. The Coalition for Fantasy Sports launched a first-of-its-kind cross-platform self-exclusion tool in Nebraska, allowing players to opt out across all member companies simultaneously. - Opponents: "This is not about consumer protection. It's about legitimizing an industry that converts free players into real-money gamblers," said Nate Grasz of Nebraska Family Alliance. Lynne McNally of WarHorse Casinos argued the bill violates the Nebraska Constitution by allowing betting against the house without a licensed racetrack operator.
By the numbers: 60,000+ fantasy sports participants in Nebraska; estimated $2-3 million in annual tax revenue; 2,500+ hours of responsible play training by PrizePicks annually.
What's next: No vote was taken. The committee will consider amendments addressing constitutional concerns about betting against the house.
Committee sentiment: Supportive: Sen. Tom Brandt Unclear: Sen. Stan Clouse, Sen. Bob Andersen, Sen. Jared Storm, Sen. John Cavanaugh
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB406: Shell bill for General Affairs Committee use
Introduced by: Sen. Rick Holdcroft | Testimony: 0 proponents, 0 opponents, 0 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
The committee heard a shell bill—an empty legislative vehicle that can be amended if needed. LB406 serves as a placeholder for the General Affairs Committee, allowing it to carry substantive legislation if circumstances require it during the session. Holdcroft stated the bill is not needed at this time.
Why it matters: Shell bills are procedural tools that allow committees flexibility to address late-breaking issues without requiring a new hearing.
What's next: No vote was taken. One online opponent was submitted for the record.
Committee sentiment: Unclear: Sen. Barry DeKay
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB405: Shell bill for General Affairs Committee use
Introduced by: Sen. Rick Holdcroft | Testimony: 0 proponents, 0 opponents, 0 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
The committee heard a second shell bill—an empty legislative vehicle that can be amended if needed. LB405 serves as a placeholder for the General Affairs Committee. Committee research analyst Micah Chaffee explained that shell bills must be specific to a chapter number and can be used as carriers for multi-bill packages or last-minute non-controversial changes. If a substantial amendment (white copy) is needed, a new hearing would be required.
Why it matters: Shell bills provide procedural flexibility for committees to address unforeseen legislative needs without requiring a new hearing for minor, non-controversial changes.
What's next: No vote was taken. One online opponent was submitted for the record.
Committee sentiment: Unclear: Sen. Stan Clouse, Sen. John Cavanaugh
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
Session Notes
The committee heard six substantive bills related to gambling and sports betting (LR20CA, LB421, LB438, LB63, LB342) and two shell bills (LB406, LB405). The hearing lasted the entire day and covered significant policy debates about online sports betting, fantasy sports regulation, and consumer protections. Committee Chair Holdcroft noted that committee members may come and go during hearings due to other committee obligations. Vice Chair John Cavanaugh presided over portions of the hearing. The committee did not take votes on any bills during this hearing. All substantive bills will require further consideration before advancing to General File.
Generated by NE Wire Service | Source: Nebraska Legislature Transcribers Office This is an AI-generated summary. Verify all claims against the official transcript.