Sen. Christie New Craig, R-Chesapeake, received a second chance on her skill games legislation after it initially failed to advance out of a subcommittee earlier this week. The bill advanced out of the General Laws Committee Wednesday – but not without some confusion and drama.
“This bill is a long time coming,” New Craig said before the committee voted. “We have seen this for four years. The commonwealth has given up at least over a billion dollars in tax revenue that we could have collected that could go to K-12 schools and other services.”
The proposal would establish taxes and penalties for skill game machines in the commonwealth. During the General Laws Subcommittee on Monday, the legislation failed to receive a “second” when it was moved to report the bill and advance.
As subcommittees only offer recommendations to full committees on legislation, the bill was amended Wednesday by New Craig and advanced with some bipartisan support.
She added two new provisions, one to verify age before an individual uses a skill game machine and one to allow localities the opportunity to opt out of legalizing skill games through a referendum.
The process of advancing the bill was hectic in the General Laws meeting Wednesday as initially, they tried to roll it into legislation from Sen. Bryce Reeves, R-Spotsylvania, that would establish an independent Virginia Gaming Commission.
Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed skill games legislation last year but has signaled recently that he wants an independent Virginia Gaming Commission to be established.
“We must take action to enable the creation of the Virginia Gaming Commission to consolidate the regulatory oversight of our vast gaming ecosystem under one entity,” he said during his State of the Commonwealth address earlier this month.
When motions were made to combine the two bills Wednesday, the senators on the committee were confused — as it seemed like all of the language from New Craig’s bill would be wiped out, and only Reeves’ original language, which is different, would remain.
“I don’t understand why we would make a policy decision to completely the muddy the waters on all of that stuff when this is the one bill we really actually need to get through in order to get our state in a good place on all gaming,” Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, D-Henrico, said about combining the two bills and pointing out that Youngkin vetoed skill games last year.
After a lot of questions and confusion, the motion to roll the two bills together was withdrawn and Reeves’ bill was passed on its own.
New Craig’s bill was then taken up and passed after she introduced the amendments.
“This bill is about gaming and regulation, just like Senator Reeves’ bill, and we just want it to be taxed, regulated and enforced right now,” New Craig said.
Both of the bills have been referred to the Senate Finance Committee.
Proponents and opponents of the skill games legislation responded after the committee meeting.
“Members of VA MAC are encouraged by the advancement of SB 1323 and are thankful to legislators for continuing to support the regulation of skill games and Virginia’s small businesses,” said Rich Kelly, president of the Virginia Merchants and Amusement Coalition. “With inflation still on the rise, ensuring that struggling small businesses have access to the supplemental revenue generated by skill games as soon as possible is critical.”
Opponents said they are disappointed but not surprised.
“It is disappointing, but not surprising, to see the same bad actors who continually attempt to skirt existing Virginia law, resort to shady tactics in an attempt to hijack legislation with strong bipartisan support in an effort to sneak through legislation that would legalize over 30,000 ‘skill’ games in Virginia,” said Nick Larson, spokesperson for Virginians Against Neighborhood Slot Machines. “We continue to advocate for the rejection of any legislation that allows bad actors to prey on vulnerable Virginians and thank the Senators who stood up for them today.”
(Note: Virginians Against Neighborhood Slot Machines are often sponsors of the Virginia Political Newsletter. That relationship in no way impacted the coverage of this legislation. They had no input other than being asked to comment on the results.)