Texas proposal could put sports betting and casinos on the ballot in 2027

Dig Deeper

The Backstory

Texas returns to a constitutional fight

Texas’ latest sports betting proposal lands in a state where the legal pathway has long been clear but politically difficult: lawmakers must first agree to ask voters to change the Constitution. House Joint Resolution 52 would do that by authorizing the Legislature to create a regulated framework for sports betting and casino gaming, with a statewide vote possible on Nov. 2, 2027.

The measure is broader than earlier efforts because it does not stop at mobile sports wagering. It would also allow lawmakers to authorize casinos, set locations and establish market rules through later legislation. That structure leaves the most contentious details for a follow-up debate while asking legislators first to approve the concept of gambling expansion.

The stakes are unusually high because Texas remains one of the largest untapped gambling markets in the U.S. Its population, professional sports presence and tourism hubs have made it a long-term target for sportsbook operators, casino companies, sports franchises and commercial real estate interests. Yet the state’s constitutional restrictions mean ordinary legislation is not enough. A proposed amendment needs two-thirds support in both chambers before voters get a say.

Earlier bills exposed the same bottleneck

The new proposal follows years of stalled efforts to legalize wagering in Texas. A previous push came through House Joint Resolution 134, filed by Rep. Sam Harless, which sought to let voters decide whether to authorize regulated sports betting. A companion proposal, House Joint Resolution 137, went further by pairing online betting with land-based casinos and a 15% tax rate. Those efforts underscored a recurring strategy: use a constitutional amendment to move the decision from the Capitol to the electorate.

That earlier legislative push also highlighted the demand already present in the state. In the account of how Texas lawmakers filed a bill to legalize online sports betting, GeoComply data showed 1.48 million Texans attempted in November to log into online sportsbooks licensed in other states. That activity did not create a legal Texas market, but it gave supporters a central argument: residents are already seeking access, while tax revenue and consumer protections flow elsewhere.

Former Gov. Greg Abbott had signaled some openness to online sports betting, telling the Houston Chronicle he would be surprised if Texans were not already doing it. But gubernatorial tolerance was never the main obstacle. The Senate, led by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, was the chamber where sports betting and casino measures faced the steepest resistance. Patrick’s opposition meant even measures with industry support and public visibility struggled to advance.

Political turnover changed the calculation

The current proposal is tied directly to a shift in Texas politics after the 2026 midterms. Democrats are set to control the House, Gina Hinojosa was elected governor and Vikki Goodwin will replace Patrick as lieutenant governor. That change matters because the lieutenant governor controls the Senate’s agenda, committee referrals and floor access. For gambling supporters, the issue has moved from being structurally blocked to procedurally possible.

Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones quickly framed the results as an opening. In a recent interview on 105.3 The Fan, Jones said the “turnover” in Texas politics could help advance legalization. His position was not new. As detailed in coverage of how the Dallas Cowboys owner saw a new chance for legal sports betting after Democratic wins, Jones has supported legalization for years, arguing that Texas is forgoing significant revenue and that regulated betting could deepen fan engagement.

Jones’ influence is symbolic as much as political. The Cowboys are among the most valuable sports franchises in the world, and professional teams have become important advocates for regulated betting in other states. Legal sports wagering creates sponsorship, advertising and engagement opportunities, particularly around mobile platforms. Still, Jones’ support does not reduce the constitutional threshold. HJR 52 would need at least 100 votes in the 150-member House and 21 votes in the 31-member Senate before voters could consider it.

A wider package raises both opportunity and risk

By combining sports betting with casino gaming, HJR 52 could broaden its coalition while giving opponents a larger target. A sports-only proposal might appeal to teams, mobile operators and some budget-focused lawmakers. A casino package adds destination resort developers, local economic development advocates and labor interests. It also raises questions about where casinos would be located, how many licenses would be issued and how communities would respond.

The proposal’s reported tax cap of 15% for sports betting and casino revenue is consistent with earlier Texas discussions but modest compared with some states that have leaned on gambling to raise more money. Maryland shows how quickly the debate can shift once a market is legal. Gov. Wes Moore’s proposal to double the state’s online sports betting tax from 15% to 30% prompted analysts to warn of pressure on operators and investors. Coverage of how Maryland tax hikes could rattle the online sports betting sector illustrated a broader national issue: states may legalize at one rate, then revisit taxes when budgets tighten.

For Texas, that experience cuts two ways. A lower tax rate could make the market more attractive to operators and encourage competitive promotions, technology investment and consumer migration from offshore or out-of-state options. But critics may argue that a 15% cap gives away too much value in a state with massive demand. Lawmakers would have to balance revenue expectations against the goal of creating a viable regulated market that can compete with illegal or gray-market alternatives.

Opposition remains organized and familiar

Gambling expansion in Texas has never failed solely because of procedure. Social conservatives, religious groups and anti-gambling advocates have long argued that sports betting and casinos could increase addiction, financial stress and harms to young people. Rob Kohler of the Christian Life Commission has already warned that expanded gambling could hurt young Texans, signaling that opposition will be active if HJR 52 advances.

Those arguments may gain force because the proposal includes casinos with licenses lasting at least 40 years. Long license terms can help developers justify multibillion-dollar investments, but they also make expansion feel permanent. Opponents are likely to frame the measure as a generational decision that would reshape communities, not merely legalize an activity already happening on phones.

Supporters will counter that prohibition has not eliminated betting. Instead, they are expected to argue, it has pushed Texans toward out-of-state apps, offshore sites, informal bookmakers and emerging products such as prediction markets. The Texas Senate’s recent look at prediction markets showed lawmakers are already confronting boundary questions about products that resemble wagering but may claim different regulatory treatment. A legal framework for sports betting could clarify what is allowed, who can offer it and how consumers are protected.

The ballot is the prize, not the finish line

Even if HJR 52 clears the Legislature, a 2027 ballot measure would only begin the next phase. Voter approval would authorize lawmakers to regulate sports betting and casinos, but it would not automatically launch a market. The Legislature would still need enabling laws covering licensing, taxation, enforcement, responsible gambling standards, advertising limits, data rules and the role of professional teams, racetracks or tribal interests.

That sequencing is why the current debate is less about immediate betting apps and more about control. Lawmakers are being asked to decide whether Texas should continue banning an activity many residents can access indirectly or create a state-regulated system with tax collections and oversight. The political turnover has made that question more plausible than in previous sessions. It has not made it easy.

The central test will be whether supporters can build a coalition large enough to satisfy the two-thirds requirement, especially in the Republican-controlled Senate. If they can, Texas voters would get the decision that prior bills sought but never secured. If they cannot, the country’s biggest unopened sports betting market will remain on the sidelines, with Texans still reaching beyond state law to participate in an industry expanding around them.