.svg)
While most disputes over sports betting and online gaming legalization center around which stakeholders stand to benefit and which stand to lose out, a hearing Wednesday (January 8) in Minnesota reminded us of the presence of anti-gambling opponents.
Minnesota is perhaps the state with the most optimism surrounding it for the passage of sports-betting legislation in 2025 after key stakeholders reached the framework of an agreement in 2024 but were unable to finalize it before the clock ran out on the legislative session.
Much of that conversation was focused on the lobbying battle between Indian gaming tribes and racetrack operators over sports betting, but another core constituency is those who are opposed to expanding gaming in the North Star State to include online betting.
“The entire debate in the capitol, among the authors and so on, was, who's going to profit? The tribes or the tracks, who's going to make the money?” said state Senator John Marty, the chair of the Senate Finance Committee.
“But never a look at the suicides? Never a look at the mental health challenges? Never look at the risk to kids or risk to athletes?
“None of that's been heard after 30-some hearings in the legislature, and we want to take a look at that,” Marty continued.
Marty organized such a hearing on Wednesday that was exclusively focused on the harms of sports betting, with testimony from groups such as Stop Predatory Gambling, which opposes online gambling expansion, and researchers from UCLA, Northwestern and the University of Oregon who have conducted studies showing links between sports betting and consequences, such as negative financial health, and in the case of Oregon, increased domestic violence.
The legislative framework supposedly agreed to by tracks, tribes and other stakeholders last year would have included some of the strictest responsible gaming measures seen in any U.S. state to date.
Among other restrictions, the legislation would have imposed default deposit and loss limits for each new account upon opening, a required three-hour wait to wager newly deposited funds, and a prohibition on operators sending push notifications for any purpose other than fraud alerts.
“Recent versions of a Minnesota sports wagering bill have included the strongest provisions to protect bettors of any law in the nation,” noted Andy Platto, executive director of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, in written testimony that was submitted to the committee for Wednesday's hearing.
“MIGA tribes support those measures and are committed to the goal of addressing problem gambling responsibly, with thoughtful policy and new dedicated resources,” Platto added.
Still, Marty said that the framework does not go far enough and that he will again propose his legislation that includes stronger protections, such as banning any advertising in media where more than 10 percent of the audience is expected to be underage.
“My pitch is, if we're going to legalize sports betting, let's do it responsibly and the existing bill is nothing like that,” Marty said, arguing that funding streams for gambling addiction that were initially included were stripped away as the bill progressed.
“I would still say I think the smartest thing would be to not do it at all, but I intend to push a bill saying if we’re going to do it, let’s do it in a way that no other state has done it.”
Minnesota’s legislative session is set to formally begin on January 14 and run through May 19.
