Federal Sports Betting Regulation in Discussion
A Senate committee discussed the potential for a federal sports betting regulation during an almost two-hour session on Tuesday. Lawmakers also discussed the widespread legalization of the industry across the US and how sports betting affected athletes, the public, and the integrity of the sports industry.
After the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision to invalidate a federal statute that essentially barred sports betting outside of Nevada, Illinois Democrat and Senate Judiciary Committee chair Richard J. Durbin stated that the activity has become a public health concern. Missouri is slated to join 38 other states and DC in legalizing sports betting in 2025, totaling 39 states with this regulation. Considering the potential for nationwide rules for the $10 billion sports betting sector, this Senate hearing was the first of its kind.
Even though it was a lame-duck session, one of the most important Senate committees debated these problems, showing how quickly the US sports betting sector has grown. Even those in the gambling business were taken aback by its meteoric ascent over the past six years. Thus, government authorities are trying to figure out how to keep up with the growing number of people who bet on football.
Federal Sports Betting Regulation in the Works
According to pay per head sportsbook reports, Americans lawfully bet over $30 billion on sporting events in the most recent quarter. An extra 2.5 million adults may be dealing with a serious gambling problem annually. At the same time, an additional 5–8 million have moderate or mild gambling issues, according to the National Council on Problem Gambling. However, there is no agreement on who is responsible for troubled bettors.
After receiving unanimous approval from the committee’s majority and minority members, witnesses were called to testify. As legalized sports betting spread across the country, Charlie Baker, NCAA president, informed the committee that allegations of integrity problems and harassment of college players and coaches tied to betting had increased.
Prop bets, connected to an individual athlete’s performance rather than the game’s outcome, have been outlawed on college sports in several states thanks to Mr. Baker’s leadership of the NCAA. Among the practices that Harry Levant, a director of gambling policy at Northeastern University’s Public Health Advocacy Institute and a recovering gambler, raised red flags with the committee: in-game betting, misleading advertising, and the usage of virtual VIP hosts, who operators pair with heavy gamblers to send them targeted promotions and incentives to keep betting.
No Federal Oversight Needed
Committee member David L. Rebuck, a consultant for the gaming group and a former New Jersey regulator, said that federal regulation was unnecessary. He supported the idea that state and tribal governments should handle the matters brought up during the hearing by citing state-level programs like self-exclusion lists and collaborations with addiction treatment centers.
According to political news reports, the federal government has been slow to act on many bills concerning sports betting in recent years. In September, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Democratic Representative Paul Tonko of New York introduced the SAFE Bet Act. It would impose limitations on advertising, affordability checks, and the use of artificial intelligence to generate bets and target bettors.
Gaming organizations vehemently opposed the bill. During last week’s meeting of the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States, AGA president Bill Miller expressed his expectation that the sector will face less federal monitoring in the coming years.