A trio of Ohio lawmakers believe the legalization of online casino gambling could be a net win for the Buckeye State — and that regulators should roll back their ban on college player prop betting.
Included in the report of the Study Commission on the Future of Gaming in Ohio that was released last week was a letter from the three Republican House members on the committee outlining their thoughts.
One subject tackled by the GOP lawmakers was the possible legalization of iGaming and iLottery in Ohio, which they noted had generated "a lot of discussion" during the commission's work.
Some of that talk came from the operators of brick-and-mortar casinos and lottery outlets who were worried about the effect it could have on their revenue should Ohioans have the opportunity to gamble more online rather than in person.
“While we understand their hesitation to expand due to an uncertain impact, we believe that iLottery and iGaming could be a net benefit to the state of Ohio,” wrote Representatives Jay Edwards, Jeff LaRe, and Cindy Abrams. “Looking at other states who have implemented either or both iLottery and iGaming, we see significant increases to tax revenues generated with greater participation but also that in-person sales continued to increase. That can largely be contributed [sic] to more people participating in the market on their phones and becoming more comfortable/knowledgeable about doing it at a physical location.”
The three reps pointed to jurisdictions such as Connecticut, which they said enjoyed 44.7% growth in its overall gaming market in 2023, the second year of iGaming in the New England state.
“These tax revenue benefits to the state and funding that could be provided to our K-12 education system cannot be overlooked,” they added.
Still, the Republican House members noted that future legislative sittings would have to ensure any expansion of gaming is done safely, protecting user data, and without harm to brick-and-mortar operators.
“While the state should proceed with caution and care with any expansion of this magnitude, with the right regulatory framework, these types of gaming can thrive with nominal impact to our current system,” the lawmakers wrote.
Much to think about
The comments are just a small part of the 350-page report, which was required to be done as part of a budget bill passed last year by the Ohio legislature.
House Bill 33 gave the study commission until June 30 to submit its report to the legislature. Four meetings were held by the commission earlier this year, and the bulk of its report is the testimony collected from the industry and other interested parties.
While lawmakers are under no obligation to heed its recommendations, the commission was formed after a major shift to the gaming landscape in the Buckeye State, which was the legalization and launch of Ohio sports betting in early 2023.
There have been additional legislative and regulatory tweaks since then, including a doubling of the state's tax rate to 20% and a ban on college player prop betting due to concerns about student-athlete harassment by gamblers.
Here is the full text of Ohio's ban on college player prop betting, which is now part of the state's event and wager catalogue:https://t.co/2WwekrIWl6 pic.twitter.com/McEHSfs8qv
— Geoff Zochodne (@GeoffZochodne) February 23, 2024
The three Republicans on the 11-person study commission took aim at the tax hike, calling it "premature" and damaging to the growth of legal sports betting in the state. They also trained their sights on the Ohio Casino Control Commission's decision earlier this year to outlaw wagering on college player props, which came at the behest of the NCAA, arguing the ban was unnecessary.
College athletes are now being paid to play in certain sports, the Republicans wrote, no different from professional sports that attract plenty of player prop wagering.
“Reports of harassment and potential threats are unacceptable at any stage of athletics,” the lawmakers said. “Such acts should be investigated and prosecuted accordingly. But the response from the OCCC to simply ban prop-betting on individual collegiate athletes looks to solve the problem without addressing the issue. We recommend that the OCCC’s policy be rescinded and prop betting on college athletes be restored.”
The comments suggest there is at least some political support for college player prop betting in Ohio. Whether it prompts the Ohio Casino Control Commission to change course remains to be seen, though, even in a state that is dominated politically by Republicans. Notably, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine supported the removal of college player prop bets from the menus of legal sportsbooks in the state and has yet to alter that stance.
“The Ohio Casino Control Commission took quick action to protect student athletes from unnecessary and potentially harmful threats,” DeWine said in a February press release. “Amending rules to focus bets on the team and away from individual athlete will improve the marketplace in Ohio and properly focus betting attention on the teams and away from individual student athletes."
Tether-some thoughts
Other comments in the study commission report also showed some disagreement over the future of gaming in Ohio. State Sen. Al Landis, for instance, wrote in his own letter in the report that he was opposed to expanding the lottery. His comments also suggest he is opposed to iGaming.
“My position is to maintain the status quo and keep the brick and mortar sites rather than have the state expand into iLottery and other forms of virtual gaming,” Landis, a Republican, wrote.
Across the political aisle, Democratic Rep. Bride Rose Sweeney seemed open to the idea of iGaming, but only if it did no harm to existing players in the state’s gaming industry.
“The state could legalize only one type of iGaming, such as online poker, to test the waters while still chipping away at the illicit market,” Sweeney suggested. “Another proposal that seemed well-received was requiring licenses to be linked to the existing brick-and-mortar industry in order to have a more seamless transition.”
