North Dakota lawmakers are considering a proposal to abolish the state’s Gaming Commission, leaving regulatory matters under the direct control of the Attorney General’s Office.
On Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 4-3 to advance Senate Bill 2224, introduced on January 20, 2025, by Senators Janne Myrdal and Larry Luick.
The bill, however, barely cleared the Senate, with 25 senators voting in favor and 21 opposed.
What is left now is for the bill to clear the House and then make its way to the governor’s desk, where it will either receive a signature of approval or a veto.
In North Dakota, the state’s Attorney General’s Office takes the lead, drafting administrative rules that are designed to regulate the industry’s activities.
These proposed rules are then vetted by the Gaming Commission, an independent body composed of governor-appointed members who bring their expertise to bear on the issue. Following a thorough review, the Commission either approves or rejects the rules, which are then sent to the Administrative Rules Committee for final consideration.
Opposition party weighs in
Streamlining the process is the goal of the proposed changes, which would cut out the middleman. On the surface, this might allow rules to be approved and implemented more quickly. However, not everyone is convinced that this is a good idea. Some critics are warning that by bypassing the current checks and balances, the changes could create a power vacuum.
As reported by The Jamestown Sun, Scott Meske, a lobbyist for the North Dakota Gaming Alliance, said:
Our founders knew that it would be a bad idea to give too much power to one single body. That’s kind of what Senate Bill 2224 does: giving 100% of the oversight and regulation to one office.
“We think the attorney general has done a fine job in overall regulating this industry as it’s grown and changed and morphed over the past few years. But taking away this level of checks and balances is just sets a very precarious precedent,”
During Wednesday’s floor session, Sen. Ryan Braunberger of Fargo voiced his reservations about dismantling the commission, suggesting that the legislature is moving too quickly and that more thought is needed before making such a drastic change.
To counter Braunberger’s opinion, Luick mentioned that so far the commission has not acted like an asset to the state; in essence, its removal will rather not be felt than be detrimental.
Testimony shared that the Commission has not even met for more than a year and do not know when they will meet again. This seems to be more of a detriment than an asset of any kind … This Commission is something that is there by name and just needs to be done away with, I believe.
Dissolving regulator would leave expansion to tribes
One side effect of dismantling the state’s regulatory body would be to make future commercial gaming expansion unlikely. Although the Attorney General’s Office may be able to handle charitable gaming, other gambling verticals typically require more dedicated oversight.
This means that if North Dakota online casinos or other new forms of gaming come to the state, the only likely path is through tribal compacts. Federally-recognized tribes already control retail sports betting in North Dakota. The push to dissolve the regulator appears to affirm that they’re likely to enjoy a monopoly on any other non-charitable gaming that comes to the state as well.
In other related news, the North Dakota Senate has just voted on a bill that would clamp down on the number of organizations allowed to run charitable gaming operations in the state. The proposed law would strip certain groups of their “public-spirited” status, limiting the range of organizations with access to gaming as a revenue stream.