SAFE Bet Act Explained: What the Bill Would Change

The SAFE Bet Act is a proposed federal bill, not a law: it would set minimum national standards that each state’s sports betting program must meet. As of October 2026, Congress.gov lists the Senate version, S. 1033, as Introduced, and its latest recorded action is a March 13, 2025 referral to the Judiciary Committee. The House version, H.R. 2087, was introduced on March 11, 2025 and referred to the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Natural Resources Committee.

Its short title stands for the Supporting Affordability and Fairness with Every Bet Act of 2025. This article explains what the Senate text says, how the bill would work if it were enacted, and the arguments that supporters, industry groups and others have made about it. USGamingLaw does not take a side on the bill, and nothing here is legal advice.

What Is the SAFE Bet Act?

The bill is the latest version of a proposal that was first introduced in September 2024, when the American Gaming Association issued a statement responding to its introduction by Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Representative Paul Tonko (D-NY). The sponsors reintroduced it in March 2025, in what Senator Blumenthal’s office described in a press release as legislation creating nationwide consumer protections and standards for mobile sports betting.

The sponsors framed the bill around public health. Their release said the bill would require states that offer sports betting to meet minimum federal standards in marketing, affordability and artificial intelligence. Congress.gov classifies the bill under the policy area of Health, which matches that framing, and the Senate bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee.

The bill matters because of how U.S. sports betting is regulated today. After the 2018 Supreme Court decision that allowed states to legalize sports betting, which the sponsors’ release cites as the start of widespread legalization, each state has written its own rules. The SAFE Bet Act would add a federal layer on top of those state programs. How the states reached that point is covered in how states legalized sports betting after Murphy v. NCAA, and the decision itself is explained in Murphy v. NCAA and PASPA explained.

What the Senate Text Says

A general prohibition with state exceptions

Section 101 of S. 1033 makes it unlawful for any person to knowingly accept a sports wager, with two exceptions. An operator located in an opt-in state may accept wagers in accordance with state law, and a person may accept a wager under an applicable state social gambling law. A state becomes an opt-in state by running a sports wagering program that the Attorney General has approved.

The bill sets out how that approval works. A state submits an application to the Attorney General, and the Attorney General must approve it within 180 days of a complete application unless the program fails the bill’s standards. An approval is valid for three years, after which the state may apply to renew, and the Attorney General would write regulations for emergency revocation and administrative review.

Penalties and timing

Violating the prohibition would carry a civil penalty of up to the greater of $10,000 or three times the amount of the wager, with a separate violation for each wager. The bill says a violation is not itself a crime, but it also says the civil remedy does not replace criminal prosecution under other federal laws, including sections 1084 and 1955 of title 18. The prohibition would take effect 18 months after enactment.

The Standards States Would Have to Meet

Section 103 lists the standards a state program must meet. Several concern the kinds of wagers allowed. The bill would bar proposition bets on amateur athletic competition or intercollegiate sports, and it would prohibit wagers on a sporting event once the event has commenced. It would also require each wager type to be approved by the state regulator under criteria such as whether the outcome is verifiable.

Other standards concern promotions and rewards. The text prohibits reload bonuses offered when a customer’s balance approaches zero, bars rewards above $5 that are tied to a customer’s level of gambling activity, and bars VIP programs that compensate customers based on deposits, losses or the pace of play.

A third group concerns consumer protection. States would need to run a self-exclusion process and take part in a national self-exclusion list. Affordability rules would limit an operator to five deposits in a 24-hour period and prohibit credit card deposits. Larger wagers would trigger affordability checks: before accepting more than $1,000 in 24 hours or $10,000 in 30 days, an operator would have to verify that the proposed deposit is not more than 30 percent of the person’s monthly income, or satisfy a reasonable lender standard.

Title II adds public health provisions, including a national self-exclusion list, an annual nationwide survey on online sports betting and a Surgeon General’s report. These provisions are separate from state licensing, and they would operate at the federal level.

Where the Bill Stands and What Remains Open

The table below summarizes the status recorded on Congress.gov, as of October 2026. Both bills remain at the first stage of the legislative process, and neither has a recorded committee vote or floor action on the pages reviewed.

The status could change if a committee acts, so the Congress.gov pages are the place to confirm the latest action. Several questions are open. The House bill’s committee referral was made for a period to be determined by the Speaker, according to the recorded action, and the Senate bill’s Congress.gov page lists no Congressional Budget Office cost estimates.

Another open question is how the standards would interact with existing state rules, since the Attorney General would decide whether each program meets them. Whether any version of the bill advances is not something the sources reviewed can predict.

The Debate Over the Bill

Supporters present the bill as a response to gambling-related harm. In the March 2025 release, Senator Blumenthal described sports betting as a source of addiction risk, and Representative Tonko compared the proposed guardrails to federal guidelines for the tobacco and alcohol industries. The sponsors say the aim is not to stop people from betting, according to Representative Tonko’s remarks in the release.

Industry groups and some lawmakers object. Reacting to the 2024 version, the American Gaming Association said the bill would amount to a nationwide prohibition and that it overrides frameworks written by state legislatures and regulators. The iDevelopment and Economic Association called it federal overreach and argued that restrictions could push consumers toward illegal markets. Representative Dina Titus (D-NV) said the bill would pre-empt state gaming regulators.

Not every group fits either camp. The National Council on Problem Gambling said in September 2024 that it keeps a neutral position on legalized gambling and neither supports nor opposes the bill. It added that the bill, as then proposed, lacked investment in public health infrastructure and that it was pursuing a separate federal funding bill. These statements pre-date the 2025 reintroduction, so they describe the earlier text and may not reflect current positions.

Common Misconceptions About the SAFE Bet Act

One misconception is that the bill is already law. Congress.gov lists both versions as Introduced, which is the first status in its tracker, ahead of passage by either chamber. Nothing in the bill’s text takes effect unless it is enacted, and its prohibition would then start 18 months later.

A second is that the bill simply bans sports betting. The text creates a general prohibition, but operators in approved opt-in states are exempt, so the practical effect would turn on whether states obtain and keep approval. The AGA’s word “prohibition” and the sponsors’ word “standards” describe different sides of the same structure.

A third is that the bill would replace state regulators. The standards require each state to designate a public entity as its regulator, and state regulators would keep approving wager types and enforcing the rules. The Attorney General’s role would be to approve, renew and, in some cases, revoke a state’s program.

What This Means for Readers

For readers following federal gambling policy, the primary source is the bill text and the record on Congress.gov, which shows each action with its date. Sponsor statements and trade association statements are advocacy and should be read as positions, not as descriptions of the law.

Because the bill is only proposed, nothing in it changes the rules that currently apply to a sportsbook or a bettor. Current rules come from state law and state regulators. Anyone with a question about their own situation should consult a licensed attorney in their state.

Related Laws and Next Reading

The bill touches several topics covered elsewhere on USGamingLaw. Restrictions on college and player prop bets already exist in some states, as explained in how states restrict college betting and player props, and the way a bill moves through a legislature is described in how a gambling bill becomes law. Readers comparing the standards with how states regulate operators can also see how to check if an online sportsbook is licensed, which explains where licensing records are published.

Sources & References

• Congress.gov — S.1033, SAFE Bet Act, 119th Congress: actions and status
• Congress.gov — S.1033, SAFE Bet Act: text as introduced in the Senate (March 13, 2025)
• Congress.gov — H.R.2087, SAFE Bet Act of 2025: actions and status
• Office of Senator Richard Blumenthal — Blumenthal & Tonko Reintroduce SAFE Bet Act (March 12, 2025)
• American Gaming Association (industry association) — Statement on Introduction of SAFE Bet Act (September 12, 2024)
• iDevelopment and Economic Association (industry association) — Statement on the SAFE Bet Act (September 12, 2024)
• Rep. Dina Titus — Statement on Introduction of SAFE Bet Act (September 12, 2024)
• National Council on Problem Gambling — NCPG Statement on the SAFE Bet Act (September 16, 2024)