Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker’s surprise initiative supporting sports betting in the Bay State two weeks ago this week got the support of Wynn Resorts, owners of the Encore Boston Harbor.
The governor plans to forward his bill to the legislature soon, one that would legalize sports betting, but would not allow wagers on college, amateur, high school or eSports. The taxes raised would be earmarked for the Gaming Local Aid Fund and disbursed to municipalities. Revenues could be included in the fiscal year 2020 budget; which Baker says would raise $35 million a year.
Wynn’s support isn’t surprising given that the gaming giant’s two properties in Las Vegas have long offered sports book. Michael Weaver, spokesman for Wynn, commented, “We’ve not yet had the opportunity to study the bill, and therefore cannot comment on the specifics of it.” He added, “However, we do support the concept and introduction of sports betting in the Commonwealth.”
When Baker unveiled his proposal on January 17, he said sports book is a natural continuation of the existing Massachusetts gaming industry, and pointed out that neighboring Rhode Island has already legalized it at two properties near the state line.
“Our legislation puts forth a series of commonsense proposals to ensure potential licensees are thoroughly vetted and safeguards are in place to protect against problem gambling and illegal activity. We look forward to working with our colleagues in the Legislature to pass this bill into law,” said Baker.
Last week, when being interviewed on WGBH Boston Public Radio, the governor said he used New Jersey’s sports betting template. “From our point of view, it’s probably a conversation we need to have and we think this is a relatively responsible way to go about doing it,” he said.
In that state mobile platforms account for nearly two-thirds of the $1.2 billion wagered from June to December of last year. DraftKings accounted for nearly a third of that.
Under Baker’s proposal the Massachusetts Gaming Commission would issue sports betting licenses to the MGM Springfield, Plainridge Park Casino and the Encore, when it opens.
Besides holders of existing gaming licenses, a new in-person sports license would be created, which would allow its holders to offer sports book online or contract with another provider to offer it. Online sports pool operators would need to be licensed and approved by the MGC to offer the bets on mobile platforms. Licenses would cost $100,000 to apply and $500,000 if the license is granted. Licenses would expire after five years, but would be renewable.
In addition, unaffiliated groups such as DraftKings could offer online only sports betting. Under current law they would need to be fully qualified and licensed by the commission.
In person wagering would be taxed at 10 percent and online sports betting at 12.5 percent.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo told the Everett Independent, “The first issue that has to be addressed is that the integrity of the game is protected.” He added, “That being said, an in-depth analysis of any legislation proposed is warranted. The House will review any sports betting proposal submitted by the governor.”
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has not yet commented on Baker’s proposal. Besides the above responsibilities added to its plate, the commission would also be required to include the impact of sports betting on the annual report that it pays for detailing the effects of gambling on the state as a whole and host cities, including such things as personal bankruptcy rates, crime and divorce.
The state already has laws that ban minors from participating in daily fantasy sports—something it did when it legalize DFS in 2016. Those regulations would be extended to take in online gaming.
Governor Baker’s proposal isn’t the only gaming bill floating around in the legislature. It has competition from Senator Brendan Crighton, Rep. Dan Cullinane, Senator Michael Rush and Rep. Brad Hill.
Hill says he wants to open sports betting to all sports, not just professional sports, as Baker’s bill calls for.
Last year Speaker DeLeo also tasked Rep. Joseph Wagner to study the issue and bring back a proposal.
Besides Wynn, DraftKings has thrown its support behind Baker’s proposal. James Chisholm, DraftKings director of global public affairs, commented, “Legal, regulated mobile sports betting provides the best mechanism to not only protect consumers, but also to eliminate illegal offshore gambling, ensure game integrity, generate new revenue for the Commonwealth and fuel the growth of Massachusetts’ sports-tech sector.” He added, “We’re hopeful Massachusetts will seize the opportunity to establish a new national model of directly licensing mobile operators this year.”
Many observers give credit to the Bay State for spending more time studying the various issues of expanded gaming than any other state. The previously mentioned gaming impact research study implemented by the MGC is considered unique in the world for its thoroughness. The commission required the state’s casinos to implement responsible gaming pilot programs.
The MGC has also commissioned white papers on DFS and sports betting and the legislature tasked a special commission with study online gaming three years ago.
Whether Massachusetts legalizes sports betting or not, it has lost its chance to be the first to stick a toe in the water. Rhode Island introduced sports book at its two casinos just after Thanksgiving. Connecticut is mulling sports betting and online gaming.
State Treasurer Deborah Goldberg has for years warned that the state’s very successful lottery could begin a decline if it isn’t allowed to offer the games online to millennials who are less likely to buy such things at convenience stores than from their smartphones.
Former MGC Chairman Stephen Crosby, who resigned last autumn, long urged an omnibus legislative approach to gaming. In 2016 he said, “What difference does it make as a matter of public policy whether you gamble on the throw of dice or the throw of a dart. Does it make any difference that one is skillful and one is pure chance? Should they be regulated any differently? I just don’t get that.”
Both online gaming and sports bet have the same justifications, including the desirability of taking them out of the black market, and providing consumer protection, helping existing casinos by allowing them to add new technology and create new revenue; create new jobs and increase tax revenue to the state.
The two forms also require the same age and ID verification, anti-money laundering procedures, responsible gaming and verification of fund segregation.
