Wisconsin Legislators Send Tribal-Controlled Online Sports Betting Bill to Governor

• The Wisconsin Senate approved AB 601 by a 21-12 vote, sending the bill to Gov. Tony Evers’ desk for his signature
• The bill allows state tribes to offer online sports betting through a hub-and-spoke system
• The legislation firmly keeps online sports betting under tribal control in the state

---

The fate of Wisconsin online sports betting is now in the hands of Gov. Tony Evers (D).

The Wisconsin Senate today approved AB 601 by a 21-12 vote, allowing Wisconsin tribes to offer online sports betting through a hub-and-spoke system. The Wisconsin Assembly approved Rep. Tyler August’s (R-31) bill last month.

If signed into law by Gov. Evers, the legislation will allow tribes to renegotiate gaming compacts to offer online sports betting through their own platforms or through partnerships with sports betting companies. The renegotiated compacts will have to be approved by the federal government.

Following the Tribes Lead

Several senators spoke up in favor of the legislation during today’s hearing of the bill. Sen. Dianne Hesselbein (D-27) said the tribes supported the bill the entire session. By opening up the gaming compacts, it will also open up conversations regarding responsible gaming measures and safeguards to address problem gaming rates in the state.

Sen. Kristin Dassler-Alfheim (D-18) said she was prepared to follow the lead of the tribes when it came to Wisconsin online sports betting. The bill supports the first nations, she said, while companies such as FanDuel and DraftKings do not want the tribes involved in sports betting.

“They want to mainline this themselves,” she said.

The legislation will provide much needed support for the tribes and provide revenues for a service that is already taking place in the Badger State. Online sports betting already exists in Wisconsin, she said, so better to open those doors and use it to support the tribes.

However, Sen. Steve Nass (R-11) bemoaned the lack of competition in the bill. While outside sports betting companies do have the ability to operate in Wisconsin, he said, they will have to do so at great expense.

Any sports betting company operating in Wisconsin will be required to provide 60% of their revenues to their tribal partners.

“Competition is nil,” he said.

Gov. Evers has remained fairly mum on the issue, so it is unknown if he will sign the bill into law.

Tribal Controlled Wisconsin Sports Betting

If signed into law, the state will allow tribes to offer online sports betting through a “hub-and-spoke system,” which is is the same methodology used by the Seminole Tribe to legalize online sports betting in Florida. The tribe began offering online sports betting in the state in 2021, arguing that since its servers were located on its tribal land, any bet placed in the state and processed through the device were technically made on tribal land.

The Wisconsin bill will legalize online sports betting through the same “hub-and-spoke” model as the Seminole Tribe. As long as a Wisconsin tribe has an approved gaming compact with the U.S. Department of the Interior that allows sports betting, and processes sports bets through a server on its tribal land, online sports betting will be legal.

While tribes will have the ability to partner with companies such as FanDuel or DraftKings to use their online platforms, the bill’s revenue framework might make not be an attractive option for these companies to enter the state.

Legislation May Not Be Inviting For Top Sports Betting Companies

Under its revenue framework, the Wisconsin online sports betting bill may not provide an appealing market for most of the top sports betting operators in the country.

During a public hearing for the bill this past fall, Damon Stewart, counsel for the Sports Betting Alliance, reported if Wisconsin legalizes online sports betting through the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) and the proposed hub-and-spoke model, the market will not be economically viable for operators to enter.

Wisconsin’s pathway to legalization would be similar to Florida, which will require sports betting operators to provide 60% of their revenues to their tribal partners.

However, if not by this legalization method, Wisconsin voters would have to agree to amend its constitution (after two consecutive legislative votes to do so). It would likely be a more difficult path to legalization than what is currently being proposed and would threaten Wisconsin Tribes’ gaming exclusivity.

Stewart, speaking on behalf of the Sports Betting Alliance, said major sports betting operators likely would not participate in Wisconsin’s sports betting market if required to provide the majority of revenues to their tribal partners.

This story will continue to be updated as more details come in.