Is the sports betting advertising and sponsorship landscape about to see some changes? Lawmakers introduced legislation last week that would create federal standards for the industry, as well as address public health concerns about betting.

The SAFE Bet Act (Supporting Affordability and Fairness with Every Bet) was introduced by Democrats Rep. Paul Tonko (New York) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut). The effort come as the sports gambling industry has become more intertwined with traditional sports in recent years as leagues reach deals with betting operators.

“This relationship between the gambling industry and sports has reached intolerably dangerous levels, and it’s well past time for Congress to just to step up and make a difference,” Tonko told CNBC.

“Now every single solitary moment of every sporting event across the globe has become a betting opportunity. Whether you’re scrolling on social media, driving down the highway past billboards, or listening to your favorite podcast or radio station, sports betting ads are there to prompt you with an endless cascade of flashy promotions.”

Details On The Legislation

The bill would bar operators from advertising during live sports and from the hours of 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. The legislation would also end the practice of providing bonuses to new bettors and set limits on the amount users can bet. Other aspects of the proposed law include banning prop bets on college sports, forming a federal self-exclusion list, limiting the use of artificial intelligence to track bettors’ habits, and finally, putting the Justice Department in charge of approving all 38 states with legal sports betting.

Last week, the Illinois Gaming Board (IGB) approved stricter regulations on the industry in that state to limit and regulate gambling-related advertising. The move falls in line with other states like Ohio and Massachusetts that have set stricter limits on the advertising betting operators can engage in.

Federal Efforts Receive Pushback

Efforts at federal regulation have received considerable pushback from the industry. Critics point to considerable regulations already in place by state and tribal groups around the country.

“Introducing heavy-handed federal prohibitions is a slap in the face to state legislatures and gaming regulators who have dedicated countless time and resources to developing thoughtful frameworks unique to their jurisdictions,” American Gaming Association’s Senior Vice President of government relations Chris Cylke said.

Even some lawmakers in the same party as Tonko and Blumenthal have expressed their opposition to the plan. Rep. Dina Titus (Nevada) called the bill “outdated” and “unwarranted.”

“While the SAFE Bet Act is perhaps well-intentioned, pre-empting state gaming regulators by outlawing most forms of advertising and restricting the types and methods by which customers can place bets is a misguided approach,” said Titus.

Missouri is the latest state moving toward legalization after a petition initiative recently added the issue to the state’s November ballot.