The headlines coming out of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s federal sports betting hearing in the mainstream media will likely focus on the heated interactions between NCAA President Charlie Baker and lawmakers about the participation of trans athletes in college sports. However, the bulk of the conversation in Washington on Tuesday did focus on sports betting, including testimony from the following panel of witnesses:
- Former NFL player Johnson Bademosi
- NCAA President Charlie Baker
- Director of Gambling Policy at Public Health Advocacy Institute Harry Levant
- Former NJ Division of Gaming Enforcement Director David Rebuck
- National Council on Problem Gambling Executive Director Keith Whyte
The tone of the hearing was largely critical about the same issues the industry has heard about in the past couple of years. Namely, that advertising is too pervasive and that athletes are experiencing too much harassment from bettors.
Committee chair set the anti-gambling tone
Committee Chair Sen. Dick Durbin (IL) set the tone for the hearing by recounting instances of athlete harassment, various sports betting integrity scandals and a video compilation of reports from mainstream media on problem gambling.
“It is critical that Congress look into sports betting’s impact on America and determine how the industry should be regulated going forward,” he noted.
Athlete harassment a core issue of the betting hearing
Baker reiterated the NCAA’s concern with student-athlete harassment, citing the organization’s research that 10-15% of college athletes experience harassment. He recommended a federal ban on collegiate prop bets in addition to a federal crackdown on black market sites and legislation that would “strengthen sports leagues’ abilities to investigate integrity issues.”
Like Baker, Ademosi was most concerned with athlete harassment and suggested a more expansive ban on any negative markets, such as unders or betting on the chance something doesn’t happen.
“Words cannot begin to express the profound sorrow I feel that the sports we have played to bring our families and communities together have been perverted to a point where fans are attacking athletes,” he lamented.
Whyte used his time to highlight the instances of gambling harm in the U.S. and the lack of public funding for treatment, reiterating the NCPG’s endorsement of the GRIT Act, which would use funds from the federal excise tax on sports betting to support problem gambling treatment and research.
Levant, who helped author the SAFE BET Act, which would create a federal framework to oversee state sports betting, focused his testimony on the fact other addictive substances like alcohol and cigarettes have substantial ad restrictions, yet gambling does not.
“I am vehemently opposed to what has happened in just six years. What has been launched on the American people is a newly created, AI generated online gambling business model which delivers a fundamentally different, defectively designed and inherently dangerous product to every phone, tablet, computer and TV,” he warned.
Former NJ regulator says state gambling regulators are doing fine
Rebuck, who is currently unaffiliated, was the closest thing to a representative for the industry. He referenced his experience running the New Jersey regulatory body to reiterate his stance that state by state oversight largely works and collaborative efforts like shared self-exclusion lists are already underway.
During the question and answer period, lawmakers utilized much of their time to make points about other issues and reiterate stances they had coming into the hearing, but the commentary did give some indication as to the appetite for federal intervention amongst politicians on the hill.
Multiple lawmakers in favor of federal oversight
Sen. Thom Tillis (NC) noted that there is a “patchwork” of laws around sports betting across the states and compared it to marijuana laws.
“I would never vote as a matter of federal legislation to legalize gambling at the federal level, in the same way that I wouldn’t for marijuana, but I would be very open to an independent commission that would be tasked by this body to spend a year putting together guardrails and a framework that makes sense,” he suggested.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (CT), one of the sponsors of the SAFE BET Act, echoed Thills that federal oversight would help cut down on the glut of advertising and “deceptive techniques” like risk-free bet promotions. He then asked the panel point blank if they would support such legislation. While Levant and Johnson were seemingly on board, the rest of the panel noted that there are things to like and dislike about the bill.
Several lawmakers used their time to focus on issues ranging from NIL deals to trans athletes, with questions largely directed at Baker.
Sen. Adam Schiff (CA) tried to broach the topic of operators targeting problem bettors who are losers and limiting winners, but with no operators on the panel, the answers largely circumvented the issue.
AGA disappointed at lack of operator in hearing
The American Gaming Association (AGA) voiced its frustration with the lack of an industry representative on the panel in a statement issued after the hearing.
“Today’s hearing notably lacked an industry witness. This unfortunate exclusion leaves the Committee and the overall proceeding bereft of testimony on how legal gaming protects consumers from the predatory illegal market and its leadership in promoting responsible gaming and safeguarding integrity. We remain committed to robust state regulatory frameworks that protect consumers, promote responsibility, and preserve integrity of athletic competition,” said AGA SVP of Strategic Communication Joe Maloney.
Thought the AGA did not testify, they did submit testimony to the committee that did call for federal participation in the form of cracking down on black market operators.
“Enhancing federal enforcement could significantly disrupt these illegal operators and protect consumers. In addition to illegal offshore operators, enforcement actions should also be taken against sweepstakes operators that circumvent gaming laws, pay no federal taxes, operate with no regulatory oversight, put consumers at risk and steal customers from legal markets,” it read.
This was the last Senate Judiciary Committee of the session. When the group resumes, it will be under a new administration with a new makeup of lawmakers in Congress.
