The latest phase in Massachusetts online gaming politics has been shaped by legislation and public opinion. Three active bills are currently in play, and recent polls have added uncertainty by pointing in opposite directions.
The most important documents are House Bill H332, Senate Bill S235, and House Bill H4431. All three create a regulatory environment for online casinos in the state, but there are differences in the structure of each. Senate Bill 235 and House Bill 332 allow for 10 skins, and each online gambling venture would be subject to a 20% tax. House Bill 4431 allows for nine online casinos to be licensed, and each would be subject to a 15% tax.
Polls Point in Opposite Directions
The key issue from a political point of view is that public opinion remains divided. A Beacon Research survey found majority support for regulation. According to its findings, 59% of Massachusetts voters support legalizing online casino gaming and 24% oppose it. This same poll also revealed a widespread concern over the issue of unregulated offshore websites. Large majorities said they were worried about weak controls on age verification, non-payment of winnings, and the release of financial information. This supports the key point that supporters of legalization have been making: people are already gambling online, and regulation would allow the state to have some level of oversight and receive tax revenue.
However, an Emerson College poll found a very different public opinion. According to its findings, 56% of Massachusetts residents oppose the legalization of online casino gaming. Opposition was highest among those aged over 60 years, with 77% of respondents in that age group being against the idea. The poll also revealed fears about addiction, youth access, and risks posed by constant availability on mobile devices.
Industry and Advocacy Groups Frame the Issue Differently
The difference between these two polls is not limited to the numbers. It also reveals who is influencing the discussion around this issue.
The Beacon poll was carried out in association with the Sports Betting Alliance, which consists of DraftKings, FanDuel, and Fanatics. Emerson’s poll was backed by Stop iGaming in Massachusetts, which is focused on addressing the social impact of the industry expansion.
Opposition has also come from outside advocacy campaigns. For example, labour unions have expressed concerns that online casino gaming could result in a decrease of visits to brick-and-mortar casinos, leading to job losses. Another opponent of the legalisation of online gambling is the Treasurer of the state, Deb Goldberg. She argues that the state already has a good turnout of lottery participants, and gambling legalisation could cut lottery revenue, as well as increase risks of addiction.
Lawmakers Still Have Time, but No Easy Answer
For now, none of the bills have been settled. The reporting deadlines have been extended into March, indicating that the committees need more time before making a recommendation. The question now is whether regulation would bring control to the existing grey market or whether it would open gambling to the extent that the state would find it difficult to control.
