PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 11, 2025
Supporting Affordability and Fairness with Every Bet Act of 2025 or the SAFE Bet Act of 2025
This bill establishes minimum federal standards for sports betting. It also requires federal agencies to evaluate the effects of sports betting on public health.
The bill prohibits sports betting unless conducted through an approved state program; violations are subject to civil penalties. States administering a sports betting program must obtain approval of the program every three years from the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
In providing approval or renewal, DOJ must determine that the state’s program meets minimum standards specified in the bill, including
designating a state regulatory entity to regulate sports betting operators and enforce state laws,
prohibiting operators from marketing during live broadcasts of sporting events,
prohibiting betting by individuals under 21 or members of sports organizations,
implementing affordability protections such as certain deposit limits and income verification,
requiring operators to allocate funding for treatment and education on gambling disorders, and
facilitating a state self-exclusion list (and a national list in coordination with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) so individuals may voluntarily restrict or place limits on their sports betting.
Also, the bill requires various federal agencies to expand surveillance of gambling addiction, conduct a nationwide survey annually on the harm caused by online sports betting, and report to Congress on public health challenges related to sports betting.
People & committees
Rep. Tonko, Paul [D-NY-20] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 15, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2087 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2087 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2087 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2087 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.