An Act amending the act of December 19, 1988 (P.L.1262, No.156), known as the Local Option Small Games of Chance Act, in games of chance, providing for games of chance operations.
Summary
HB962 amends Pennsylvania’s Local Option Small Games of Chance Act to authorize and regulate certain virtual sales and operations for games of chance conducted by eligible organizations. The bill allows organizations to accept electronic payments, including credit cards, debit cards, and mobile payment services, when selling raffle or drawing tickets, and it permits the winner reveal to occur through internet-based conferencing software or certain social networking livestream tools. At the same time, it places strict limits on how the winner is revealed, prohibiting animation, still or moving images, graphic presentations, and the use of slot machines, video gaming terminals, electronic video monitors, or simulated gambling programs in the reveal process.
Impact
The bill would add a new section to the Local Option Small Games of Chance Act governing online and electronic conduct of raffles and drawings. It would require eligible organizations to use location verification to block out-of-state participants, verify identity and age, record participant acknowledgments, and ensure compliance with federal restrictions on unlawful internet gambling. The measure would therefore expand permissible fundraising methods for nonprofits and other eligible organizations while imposing compliance obligations related to geolocation, identity authentication, and age screening.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal legislative debate or roll-call sentiment is available. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at modernizing charitable gaming rules to reflect current payment and communication technologies while preserving anti-gambling safeguards. The overall tone of the proposal is regulatory and permissive rather than expansive gambling legalization.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the use of electronic and mobile payments for games of chance, the allowance of internet-based conferencing and livestream platforms for winner reveals, and whether these features could blur the line between charitable raffles and prohibited online gambling. Opponents may focus on the risk of broader digital gambling access, while supporters are likely to emphasize that the bill limits participation to in-state adults, requires identity and location verification, and forbids slot-machine-like or simulated gambling elements. The absence of committee discussion means no specific member objections are documented in the provided record.
Creating local options for games of chance, authorizing keno throughout the state, and changing charitable gaming license fees and reporting requirements.