Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
iGaming debate divides Maryland senators, with revenue and addiction risks central to testimony
Loading...
Summary
Sponsors said regulated iGaming could generate hundreds of millions for education and recapture illegal-market dollars; unions and problem-gambling advocates warned of job losses, addiction spikes and community harm. The committee heard both sides and took no vote.
Senate testimony on proposals to legalize and regulate online casino gaming centered on a familiar trade-off: large projected revenues and industry modernization on one side, and public-health, workforce and local-economy risks on the other.
Senator Watson (sponsor) framed his bill as a referendum-authorized, tightly regulated approach that would bring online casino games under the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Commission's supervision, require license fees and social-equity provisions, and dedicate revenue to the Blueprint education trust fund. He cited revenue estimates of roughly $250 million annually (market maturity projections) and said regulation would allow the state to bring illegal offshore play under consumer protections.
Supporters from the regulated gaming sector (including MGM, Caesars and other operators) and trade groups said iGaming in other states produced substantial new tax revenue without destroying retail casino demand, and that regulation can and should include strong consumer protections: age and identity verification, deposit and spend limits, self-exclusion, and problem-gambling funding.
"This is the only bill introduced this session to generate a new revenue stream," the sponsor said, noting license structures, live-dealer studio jobs, social-equity ownership mandates, and distribution plans for education and problem-gambling funds.
Opponents, including unions representing casino workers, the Maryland Center of Excellence on Problem Gambling, and community advocates, warned of job losses at brick-and-mortar casinos and sharply higher problem-gambling rates. Unite Here presented data from New Jersey and Michigan showing steep iGaming revenue growth in those states and reported local job declines in some venues; peer-support specialists and people in recovery described increased helpline calls and severe personal harms tied to online formats.
Problem-gambling advocates said online casino products are engineered for constant engagement, push notifications and features that can dramatically increase time-in-app and addiction risk, and they urged stronger safeguards or more study before legalizing full-scale online casino gaming.
Questions from committee members ranged across revenue estimates, cannibalization risk to brick-and-mortar employment, consumer-protection specifics, and whether a voter referendum should be required. The sponsor stressed the referendum, privacy protections, restrictions on targeted advertising, and monthly recertification of risk disclosures for users.
The hearing closed with no committee vote. Proponents urged adoption to recapture illegal-market play and shore up education funding; opponents urged study and caution given addiction, equity and employment concerns.
