CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA (CVILLE RIGHT NOW) – The Charlottesville area’s General Assembly delegation was split on the separate bills passed by the House and Senate that will legalize and tax internet casino gambling in Virginia.

The state Senate passed SB118 19-to-17 Monday after the measure failed earlier in the 7-hour floor session 20-to-19.

In the House Tuesday, HB161 after initially failing on a 49-to 46 vote was reconsidered an-hour-and-a-half later in its floor session and passed 67-to-30.

Del. Amy Laufer (D-Albemarle Co.) initially voted against the measure but was among a group of delegates who changed their stance and ultimately supported it.

Del. Katrina Callsen (D-Charlottesville) was a “no” vote both times.

In the senior chamber, Sen. Creigh Deeds (D-Charlottesville) was a “yes” for both Senate votes.

Bills can only be considered when legislators on the prevailing side request it, and the legislative chamber approves.

In the Senate, Schuyler Van Valkenburg (D-Henrico), a few minutes after casting one of the prevailing “no” votes, made a motion to reconsider SB118 and pass it by for the day.

Late in the session, Sen. Mamie Locke (D-Hampton), the legislation’s chief patron, got approval to reconsider the bill that day and got an immediate revote which passed the bill by the single vote.

Van Valkenburg, who voted “yes” for the immediate reconsideration, did not cast a vote in the revote but a note about that result said, “Senator VanValkenburg stated that he was recorded as not voting on the question of the passage of S.B. 118, whereas he intended to vote nay.”

Sens. Bill DeSteph (R-Va Beach) and Stella Pekarsky (D-Centreville), who were previous “no” votes did not cast votes in the reconsideration.

In the House of Delegates, Del. Marcus Simon (D-Falls Church) who is the bill’s chief patron made an usual maneuver of voting against his own bill in the 49-to-46 rejection, and immediately asked for reconsideration and passing by the bill for the day, which House colleagues approved.

Later in the session, Simon’s motion to rescind the pass-by was granted and the House then passed the legislation by a wide margin.

Laufer was among the delegates who changed their vote. Her office did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

Sen. Locke said on the Senate floor about her bill, “Senate Bill 118 will legalized I-gaming in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and dramatically curtail Virginia’s thriving illegal I-gaming market and generate upwards of $14-billion in new taxable revenue over the first five years, and tens-of-billions of dollars every five years into perpetuity.”

“I-gaming has already generated billions of dollars in markets like Pennsylvania, New Jersey, West Virginia, and Michigan, and they have experienced over the years expansion of their I-gaming market.”

In the House of Delegates, Del. Tom Garrett (R-Buckingham) reflecting on what happened Monday in the Senate, and what had happened up to Tuesday with the House bills, said, “HB 161 is Frankenstein and I don’t know how we put it together but it won’t die. Don’t believe me? It was dead in subcommittee, but here it is, it was dead in committee, but here it is.

“I wasn’t in the Senate, but apparently it was dead in the Senate yesterday until they pulled it back up a couple of times and a couple of members decided to leave the room and it finally passed I think 19-to-18,” Garrett said.

He said he compared this bill to Frankenstein’s monster, which is a monster that killed many people just as this legislation will.

“Frankenstein’s monster killed people because of revenge, and this bill is going to kill people because of greed.”

“What does it do?” Garrett said. “Mark Stewart of Live Casino website said, ‘Please don’t put a casino on every single phone in every single pocket, in every single part, and indeed in every single middle school.'”

Garrett said, “That’s what this bill does, this is easily one of the worst bills of this session and by golly that’s saying something!”

In the other chamber Monday, Sen. William Stanley (R-Franklin Co) noted he supported casinos coming into the Commonwealth as well as skill gaming that would allow small businesses to get involved, “But members of the Senate, I rise today in strong opposition to SB118.”

“We are being asked to take the single most addictive device, the smartphone, a device that has already rewired the brains of our children, that has already driven anxiety, depression, and suicide rates in young people to historic levels, and now we’re being asked to put a slot machine on it.”

“Madam President, that is not modernization. That is madness,” Stanley argued.

Senate opponents also argued that age verification promising to keep people under 21 away from the gambling websites have little to no effect on youths who find work arounds all the time.

When Sen. Locke was called to speak on her bill, she responded, “Thank you, Madame President, if no one else wishes to speak because I was looking for Chicken Little.”

“We will not let our emotions and overdramatize the future, we can torture the data until it confesses, but that doesn’t make it true,” she said.

“Children are prevented from using this as it identifies with the verifications safeguards the banks use to confirm an identity that protects against underage access.”

In arguments from the opposition, Locke said, “I didn’t hear that I-gaming is already here and what SB118 will do is put parameters around what is illegal.”

The House and Senate versions have similarities in that they put the Virginia Lottery in charge of regulation and apply a 20% tax on adjusted gross revenue in addition to imposing a 6% “economic development fee” which will support brick-and-mortar casinos in the Commonwealth.

Land-based operators will pay $2-million to add online games, and online-only operators will be charged a $500,000 licensing fee.

Some of the legislation differences are the House dedicates 89% of revenue to the general fund through 2036 and sets aside 5% for gambling mitigation programs, while the Senate bill put 95% of revenues to education, 3% toward I-gaming regulation, and 2% for gambling mitigation.

The House version distributes payments to Virginia casinos across-the-board until 2032 when it will then shift toward casino losses.

The Senate version pays only casinos that demonstrate losses due to I-gaming.

The House also has a provision that would financially cover any losses the lottery might have as I-gaming expands.

The Senate plan begins July 1, 2027 while the House doesn’t begin I-gaming until early 2028.

Garrett said no matter the start, it’s too early for the young people who will be snagged in the net.

“Imagine the college student who’s squirreling away money from a summer job to pay for that next semester whose phone vibrates the night before an exam when they just can’t sleep and they look at their screen that says ‘your winning streak is waiting’,” Garrett posed.

“Before their roommate gets out of bed, that next semester’s tuition might already be gone.”

The bills, passed just before cross-over, now go to the opposite body and will go to conference committee if the versions are not reconciled.