Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Problem Gambling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Experts urge strong consumer protections and funding for problem-gambling services as iGaming debate proceeds
Summary
Public-health and problem-gambling experts testified that legalization should be paired with robust responsible-gaming standards, a dedicated funding stream, a director of responsible gambling within the Virginia Gaming Commission, and stronger links to nonprofit treatment providers.
Two sets of witnesses—responsible-gambling experts and public-health advocates—told the subcommittee that if Virginia moves forward with legalized iGaming it must build stronger consumer protections and fund treatment and prevention.
Keith White, founder of Safer Gambling Strategies LLC and former executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling, said he was neutral on legalization but strongly supported creating a Virginia Gaming Commission with a clear mandate to enforce responsible-gambling standards.
"Overall, I strongly support the creation of the Virginia Gaming Commission," White said. He recommended adopting Internet Responsible Gambling Standards as a baseline, requiring self-exclusion systems that operate across all licensed operators, using technology to detect risky play, and creating a director of responsible gambling in the commission modeled on Massachusetts.
White described rapid recent growth in calls to Virginia’s problem-gambling helpline: he said total helpline calls rose by about 1,500% between 2019 and 2024, and intakes — a closer measure of people seeking help — rose roughly 223%.
By contrast, Briandora (presentation name) Shawwal, retained by the Campaign for Fair Gambling, testified in strong opposition to legal iGaming. She argued the public-health costs of expanded online access would be substantial and cited international and U.S. studies showing elevated problem-gambling rates among online players, younger cohorts and communities close to casinos.
"I am in strong opposition to iGaming," Shawwal said, arguing that greater access—"a casino in your pocket"—increases problem rates, suicidality risk and household financial harms. She cited research attributing a higher share of revenue to a small proportion of problem gamblers (for example, Connecticut studies finding 71% of iGaming revenue came from 7% of residents) and urged that states resolve gaps in enforcement and treatment capacity before expanding access.
Both witnesses urged stronger coordination between a gaming regulator and nonprofit treatment providers. White recommended formal roles and funding for the Virginia Council on Problem Gambling and said a dedicated research fund would help the state better assess outcomes.
Ending: The committee heard competing views: technical proposals to build monitoring, self-exclusion and a funding stream for treatment, and public-health warnings that expanding access now would likely increase gambling-related harms absent more infrastructure and enforcement.
