NEWBERRY, S.C. — A proposed casino along the Interstate 95 corridor is emerging as an early dividing line in South Carolina’s Republican gubernatorial race, with candidates sharply split on whether gambling expansion could boost the state’s economy or harm its communities.
At the first GOP primary debate Wednesday, four leading candidates Alan Wilson, Josh Kimbrell, Ralph Norman and Nancy Mace offered contrasting views on casinos, online betting and the future of gambling policy in the state.
The issue, while not the central focus of the campaign, has gained traction alongside renewed legislative interest in a single resort-style casino proposal near I-95, pitched as an economic lifeline for struggling rural regions.
Clear divide on casinos
Norman delivered the most forceful opposition, framing casino development as a threat to public safety.
“You get child trafficking… sex trafficking… all types of abuse… I’m opposed to it.”
He also pledged to reject campaign donations tied to gambling interests, signaling a hardline stance against any expansion.
Wilson echoed that resistance, particularly toward brick-and-mortar casinos, warning they could be “detrimental to our state as a whole.”
Still, the state’s top prosecutor acknowledged the limits of enforcement in the digital age, saying he would consider discussions around online gambling given that “the technology doesn’t exist to stop” it.
Conditional support tied to I-95
Kimbrell struck a more nuanced position opposing widespread legalization while leaving the door open for a tightly controlled casino in a specific region.
“I don’t believe South Carolina should be Atlantic City,” he said, adding that a casino along I-95 “should not be discarded if we do it properly.”
He argued that targeted development could bring jobs and investment to economically disadvantaged areas, though he rejected mobile gambling outright, saying he does not support “being able to pull out your phone and go gamble.”
Mace stops short of taking sides
Mace avoided a firm position, instead pointing to the reality that online betting already exists in various forms.
“People are already online betting… you can bet on anything,” she said during the debate.
Rather than endorsing or opposing expansion, she suggested voters should ultimately weigh in, signaling openness to a referendum.
A high-stakes policy question
South Carolina currently permits only a state lottery, with no legal casinos or sports betting. Any move toward expansion including the proposed I-95 resort would require significant legislative action and potentially a constitutional amendment.
With no incumbent in the race for the first time in more than a decade, the next governor is expected to play a decisive role in whether gambling proposals gain traction or face another veto from the executive branch.
For now, the debate has exposed a familiar tension in South Carolina politics: economic development versus social concerns and whether a casino on I-95 represents opportunity or risk.