AGA To Massachusetts: Include College Sports In Legal Sports Betting Legislation

A prominent voice in the gambling industry hopes that Massachusetts, if it chooses to legalize sports betting, will implement a legal framework that is not overly restrictive.

On Tuesday, the American Gaming Association reached out to Massachusetts legislators via a letter, where they advocated for the legalization of regulated betting on college sports. This stance was taken in contrast to certain individuals in Massachusetts who are in favor of prohibiting such betting.

The AGA argues that by not allowing legalized sports betting, it creates an opportunity for the black market to flourish.

What’s in the AGA letter?

In response to a communication from university presidents in the state, the AGA strongly advocates for the inclusion of collegiate sporting events in any sports betting law in the Bay State.

The presidents of the eight Massachusetts colleges and universities participating in NCAA Division I basketball jointly expressed their desire for the government to explicitly outlaw betting on college sports within the state in a letter.

In its letter, the AGA adopts a completely contrasting position. Although prohibiting betting on college sports would undeniably hinder sportsbooks’ competitiveness in attracting customers, the AGA also highlights the significance of regulating this market to enhance game integrity and safeguard the interests of bettors, competitions, and athletes. They argue that such regulation would enable thorough, transparent, and cooperative monitoring by regulators and law enforcement agencies.

Regulators and law enforcement can gain valuable insights into betting patterns and activities that can aid in identifying worrisome trends and reveal illegal tampering with games and athletes. However, these protections are only available in a legal and regulated market, as the illegal marketplace lacks such safeguards.

The statement directly confronts the primary argument frequently presented by advocates in favor of prohibiting college sports betting. These proponents commonly assert that due to athletes receiving inadequate compensation for their work, they become more vulnerable to schemes involving match-fixing.

Competition serves as an additional driving force for the AGA and its members. To effectively rival both legal bookmakers in different regions and the unlawful market, upcoming sportsbooks in MA must strive to provide comparable levels of variety and quantity in order to secure every available dollar.

Although state legislators may not currently view this as a pressing matter, it has the potential to become a controversial topic. Previous endeavors to legalize sports betting approached this aspect in varying ways.

Baker’s vs. Crighton’s sports betting bills

During the most recent session, Massachusetts lawmakers deliberated on a set of bills aiming to legalize sports betting. Regrettably, not a single one of these bills managed to make it to the desk of Governor Charlie Baker.

Baker, in fact, submitted a single bill to the legislature. In its final version, the proposal aimed to fulfill the desires of college presidents by implementing a complete prohibition on betting on collegiate sporting events.

The Senate introduced a bill that was comparatively less stringent. Sen. Brendan Crighton’s proposal suggested permitting wagers exclusively on games featuring Massachusetts colleges and universities.

However, even that would be considered more restrictive than what the AGA hopes to achieve. The AGA firmly opposes any form of restriction on collegiate betting.

At present, it is challenging to gauge the prevailing preference of the majority in the state legislature. Moreover, there is no indication that Baker will strongly advocate for limitations on college sports betting, to the extent of vetoing any bill that lacks such restrictions.

The governor, known for strongly advocating the legalization of sports betting, has hinted at a possible willingness to make concessions in order to successfully reach an agreement.

A possible outcome could be a compromise, which might be the ultimate resolution. The legislature might choose a course of action that leaves no one completely satisfied, while simultaneously offering each individual a small portion of their desired outcome.

The MA legislature has options

Crighton’s framework mirrors the approach adopted by other jurisdictions such as Illinois, New Jersey, Virginia, and Washington, D.C., where legal books are prohibited from taking action on college teams within their respective areas.

Taking it a step further, New Jersey and Washington go as far as to prohibit any collegiate events from taking place within their jurisdictions. Meanwhile, other states have devised more innovative measures.

Iowa permits sportsbooks to accept bets on all college sports, except prop wagers centered on individual athletes’ performances. Conversely, Tennessee has a distinct approach where sportsbooks cannot offer in-game prop markets for collegiate games.

There have been no allegations of match-fixing in Indiana, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, as they treat college sports on par with any other sport for betting purposes.

As the Massachusetts legislature contemplates the legalization of sports betting, this particular matter will undoubtedly be among the many topics up for discussion. Regardless of the outcome, it is inevitable that there will be dissatisfied parties.