An Act amending Title 4 (Amusements) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in revenues relating to gaming, providing for revenue from expansion of gaming.
SB93 is a Pennsylvania gaming revenue bill that would amend Title 4 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, which governs amusements and gaming. Based on the caption, the measure is intended to provide for revenue from the expansion of gaming, suggesting it would create or redirect state revenue tied to additional gaming activity or gaming-related expansion. The bill text was not available in the provided materials, so the precise mechanisms, tax rates, or affected gaming categories cannot be confirmed from the record supplied.
At a high level, the bill appears aimed at increasing state revenues by broadening the gaming framework in Pennsylvania. Measures of this kind typically involve changes to how gaming proceeds are collected, allocated, or taxed, and may affect casinos, gaming operators, and state revenue streams. Because the full statutory language is unavailable here, the specific sections of Title 4 that would be amended and the exact fiscal effects cannot be identified from the provided text alone.
SB93 would amend Title 4 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, likely altering the state’s gaming revenue provisions and potentially affecting the taxation, collection, or distribution of proceeds from expanded gaming activity. The bill could impact gaming licensees, operators, and state or local entities that receive gaming-related revenue, but the exact statutory changes are not available in the provided record. Its practical effect would depend on the scope of the expansion and the revenue mechanism ultimately enacted.
The available record does not include committee testimony or recorded votes, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from the legislative discussion. The bill’s referral to the Senate Community, Economic & Recreational Development Committee indicates it was at an early stage of consideration. Based on the caption alone, the measure appears to be framed as a revenue-generating proposal, which often attracts interest from lawmakers focused on fiscal resources and economic development, though no explicit sentiment can be confirmed from the materials provided.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided transcripts or vote history because none were included. In general, bills expanding gaming revenue can raise concerns about gambling expansion, regulatory oversight, social impacts, and how new revenue is distributed, while supporters may emphasize state revenue growth and economic benefits. Without committee debate or votes, it is not possible to attribute those positions to particular legislators or stakeholder groups in this case.