South Carolina Governor Candidates Stake Out Positions on Gaming Referendum
Why It Matters
The question of whether South Carolina should expand private sector gambling — including casinos and prediction markets — is emerging as a defining issue in the 2026 gubernatorial race. How candidates position themselves on a potential public referendum could shape both the primary contest and the state’s long-term economic and regulatory landscape.
With federal regulators and federal courts actively defending prediction markets against state-level restrictions, South Carolina lawmakers may have limited ability to hold back the tide regardless of who wins the governor’s office.
What Happened
Several leading candidates in South Carolina’s 2026 gubernatorial race have now addressed the issue of private sector gaming, with positions ranging from outright support for a public referendum to cautious openness for regulatory conversation.
Congresswoman Nancy Mace, one of the frontrunners, called for a statewide referendum that would allow voters to decide the future of brick-and-mortar gaming, including casinos. “People are already online betting,” Mace said at a recent GOP debate. “You can go on to Polymarket or Kalshi — you can bet on anything. You can bet on who won the debate tonight.”
Lieutenant Governor Pamela Evette signaled a willingness to focus on effective regulation rather than prohibition. “We’ve had the lottery for decades here in South Carolina,” Evette told FITSNews. “With poly market sites like Kalshi that already operate in our state, what we really need to focus on now is how we are going to regulate it. As governor, I’d work closely with the legislature, seeking input from the public, on exactly how to do that.”
Attorney General Alan Wilson’s campaign also indicated an openness to public input. “As governor, he’ll always have a ‘doors open’ policy and seek input from the people who live here and stakeholders on all issues,” said deputy campaign manager Claire Brady. Brady added that if the General Assembly secured a two-thirds vote for a public referendum on any topic, “the governor wouldn’t be able to stop it.”
By the Numbers
- 2000: The year South Carolina voters approved the state Education Lottery through a public referendum — the precedent Mace cited for a similar vote on gaming expansion.
- Tens of millions of dollars annually flow from lottery revenues into Christian colleges and universities in South Carolina, according to reporting by FITSNews.
- 80% of Republican sheriffs in South Carolina have endorsed Attorney General Alan Wilson, according to his campaign.
- H. 4001: Legislation currently under consideration in the state legislature that would allow counties and municipalities to decide by local referendum whether to permit Sunday liquor sales — a parallel local-control measure that may set precedent for gaming decisions.
- Third Circuit Court of Appeals: Recently upheld a preliminary injunction affirming that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) holds exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets, blocking New Jersey regulators from shutting down Kalshi’s sports wagering contracts.
Zoom Out
The South Carolina debate is unfolding against a rapidly shifting national legal and regulatory backdrop. The CFTC and the Department of Justice have filed multiple lawsuits against states attempting to restrict prediction markets, with CFTC Chairman Michael Selig stating the agency would “continue to safeguard its exclusive regulatory authority over these markets.”
President Donald Trump, a former casino operator who has embraced multiple forms of private sector gaming, has lent implicit legitimacy to prediction markets at the federal level. That alignment creates political tension for state-level Republicans who oppose gambling expansion while supporting the broader Trump agenda.
The issue also intersects with ongoing government oversight concerns in the Palmetto State. Critics argue that the state’s government-run Education Lottery — which currently holds a monopoly on gambling revenue — benefits a narrow set of connected institutions at the expense of free market competition. For more on accountability questions surrounding state financial arrangements, see our coverage of the South Carolina Senate Finance Chairman’s request for a SLED investigation into budget payments to a powerful House Democrat.
What’s Next
State lawmakers will ultimately decide whether to place the gaming issue on the ballot for a public referendum. The legislature’s consideration of local-option Sunday liquor sales legislation — H. 4001 — may signal broader appetite for returning social policy decisions to voters at the local level.
Candidates are expected to continue refining their positions ahead of the 2026 primary. Meanwhile, federal court rulings are likely to continue limiting states’ ability to restrict prediction markets, potentially forcing the legislature’s hand on the broader regulatory question.
Public safety concerns remain part of the debate as well. As South Carolina weighs the potential expansion of gambling, officials are simultaneously contending with rising threats from dangerous substances. The state’s attorney general recently warned of a deadly new synthetic opioid, Cychlorphine, detected in South Carolina — a reminder that candidate positions on public safety will extend well beyond the gaming debate in the months ahead.