A concurrent resolution to amend and reenact section 25 of article XI of the Constitution of North Dakota, relating to charitable gaming and limitations on the use of gaming proceeds.
Summary
SCR 4027 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would revise North Dakota’s charitable gaming provision. It keeps the existing framework allowing the Legislature to authorize games of chance for certain nonprofit and public-spirited organizations, and it preserves the state’s authority to participate in a multi-state lottery. The resolution also clarifies that net proceeds from authorized gaming must continue to be used for educational, charitable, patriotic, fraternal, religious, or similar public-spirited purposes.
The new substantive change is a restriction on how gaming and lottery proceeds may be used. Under the proposal, proceeds from a game of chance, lottery, or similar activity could not be used to support, finance, or influence a political campaign, candidate for office, ballot measure, or political organization, except in the case of a raffle. If approved by the Legislature and voters, the amendment would be submitted to the 2026 general election and would become part of the North Dakota Constitution.
Impact
If adopted, SCR 4027 would amend Article XI, section 25 of the North Dakota Constitution and directly limit the use of charitable gaming and lottery proceeds for political activity. It would affect nonprofit gaming operators, charitable organizations, and any political entities that might otherwise receive such funds, while leaving the broader charitable gaming authorization structure intact. The measure would not change the basic legality of charitable gaming or the state lottery, but it would impose a constitutional prohibition on using those proceeds for campaign-related purposes, with a narrow exception for raffles.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have had strong support in the Senate, where it passed second reading 45-2, but it was overwhelmingly rejected in the House, where it failed 7-85 on second reading. That voting pattern suggests the proposal was acceptable to many senators but did not command broad support in the House. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows sentiment primarily through the lopsided votes rather than through detailed debate.
Contention
The main point of contention is the proposed restriction on political spending from gaming proceeds. Supporters likely viewed the amendment as a guardrail to keep charitable gaming funds focused on nonprofit and public-spirited uses, while opponents in the House appear to have objected to constitutionalizing a new limitation or to the scope of the restriction itself. The exception for raffles may also have been a point of interest, since it creates a carveout from the general ban on political use of proceeds.