The U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary kicked off its first-ever congressional hearing on sports betting on Tuesday, sparking federal scrutiny into the booming industry. The hearing, aptly titled “America’s High-Stakes Bet on Legalized Sports Gambling,” dives deep into the rapid expansion of sports betting across the United States since the Supreme Court’s landmark 2018 decision. The ruling struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), which previously limited legal sports wagering to just Nevada.
Since that ruling, the sports betting landscape has exploded, with 39 states now offering legal sports gambling. The hearing brings into focus the potential consequences of this growth, especially as sports betting becomes increasingly accessible through online platforms.
Senator Dick Durbin, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, emphasized the importance of congressional oversight in ensuring that the industry is regulated in a way that addresses its many challenges, including problem gambling and college athlete harassment. “It’s critical that Congress looks into sports betting’s impact on America and determine how the industry should be regulated moving forward,” Durbin said in his opening remarks.
The Rapid Growth of Legal Sports Betting
In 2018, Nevada stood alone as the sole state with legalized sports betting. Fast forward to 2024, and sports betting is now available in 39 states, with more likely to follow. As legal sports betting spreads, so too does the need for federal regulation and oversight. Senators have raised concerns about the potential for increased problem gambling, particularly among younger demographics, as the industry becomes more accessible via smartphones and other digital platforms.
Senator Durbin highlighted the role of mobile sports betting, noting that individuals with gambling problems now have 24/7 access to betting, leading to the possibility of severe financial consequences. “A person with a gambling problem can chase the action at the click of a button and rack up ever-increasing losses—whether on an NFL game or professional table tennis,” Durbin remarked, underscoring the dangers of constant access to betting markets.
The Committee is now calling on both state and federal officials to carefully assess the impact of this expanded access. In his speech, Durbin stressed that the federal government must step up to address these concerns, placing pressure on the sports betting industry to adopt stronger safeguards against gambling addiction.
The Witnesses Weigh In
The hearing featured testimony from five key witnesses, each offering unique perspectives on the state of sports betting in the U.S. The panel included Charlie Baker, the NCAA president; David Rebuck, former director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement; Harry Levant, director of gambling policy at the Public Health Advocacy Institute; NFLPA representative Johnson Bademosi; and Keith Whyte, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG).
Each of these witnesses discussed a range of issues, from the potential dangers of gambling on college sports to the rise in betting-related advertisements.
Baker, in particular, advocated for a nationwide ban on prop bets for college athletes, citing concerns about the integrity of college sports. “The risks to student-athletes are too great,” he explained, referencing numerous incidents where betting scandals have raised questions about the fairness of games.
Meanwhile, NFLPA representative Bademosi discussed the broader impact of sports betting on athletes, emphasizing the potential harm to both players and fans. He also joined others in calling for the banning of wagers on negative outcomes, such as injuries or player performance.
Keith Whyte, representing the NCPG, raised alarm about three growing trends in the industry: the increase in gambling advertising, the rise of technology that makes gambling more accessible, and the expansion of betting markets. “These trends are a recipe for disaster,” he warned, stressing that they could lead to a sharp uptick in problem gambling across the nation.
A Disagreement on Federal vs. State Regulation
While the committee discussed the role of federal oversight, a key point of contention emerged between witnesses on whether federal or state-level regulation was more appropriate. Rebuck, drawing from his experience as a state regulator, argued that states and tribes are better positioned to handle sports betting regulation. “State-level regulation works,” he said, citing New Jersey’s success in managing its sports betting market.
On the other hand, Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina voiced support for creating a federal task force to establish industry-wide guardrails, citing the rapid expansion of sports betting and the need for uniform oversight. While the debate continues, it’s clear that any potential federal regulation would need to strike a balance between federal oversight and the flexibility afforded to states.
A Look at the SAFE Bet Act
Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut co-authored the Supporting Affordability and Fairness with Every Bet Act, or SAFE Bet Act, which aims to curb the negative impacts of sports betting. During the hearing, Blumenthal asked the panel whether they supported the proposal.
Bademosi and Levant voiced their support for the bill, citing its potential to protect vulnerable populations from the dangers of gambling addiction. However, Baker expressed cautious support, stating that while some aspects of the bill are worth considering, the full scope remains unclear.
Meanwhile, Whyte took a more neutral stance on the bill, noting that the NCPG refrains from taking a position on proposed legislation that suggests a temporary prohibition on betting. Rebuck, however, outright rejected the bill, arguing that it undermines the ability of states to regulate their own gaming markets effectively.
The Absence of Industry Representation
One notable aspect of Tuesday’s hearing was the absence of direct industry representation, which the American Gaming Association (AGA) quickly pointed out. The trade group issued a statement after the hearing, criticizing the omission as a missed opportunity to hear firsthand how the legal gaming industry is working to protect consumers from illegal markets and promote responsible gambling practices.
The AGA has long been a vocal advocate for state-led regulation of sports betting, stressing that strong regulatory frameworks can help protect consumers, ensure fairness, and safeguard the integrity of sporting events. The absence of industry representatives left the Committee’s discussion somewhat lopsided, failing to provide a clear picture of how operators themselves are addressing growing concerns about gambling addiction and market integrity.
Leave a Reply