Is Massachusetts about to legalize online casinos on your smartphone?
Advertisement
For those already in the gambling business, the stakes are high, and the politics of it all have made for strange bedfellows.
On one side is homegrown sports betting behemoth DraftKings and arch rival FanDuel, which support the bills and stand to benefit by providing the digital platforms that power these games. Joining their camp: MGM Resorts International, which operates a casino in Springfield and online gaming platform BetMGM.
Advertisement
A DraftKings employee in the lobby of their Back Bay offices.
Lane Turner/Globe Staff
On the other side is Encore Boston Harbor, the Everett casino operated by Wynn Resorts, and UNITE HERE
Local 26, the politically influential hospitality union with many members who work at Encore; they oppose the bills, saying online gaming would cannibalize the brick-and-mortar casino business and reduce jobs in the industry. And then there are those who are wary for fear it will create more problem gamblers
by making it even easier to bet on your phone.
Supporters and opponents of online casinos squared off during a
DraftKings and FanDuel argued that online casinos should be legalized because there's already a robust illegal market, so why not regulate and tax it? According to the
mostly on websites based outside the United States.
It's the same argument that's been made to legalize sports betting in many states, including Massachusetts, ever since the Supreme Court struck down a federal ban in 2018. Since sports betting began in Massachusetts in early 2023, it has flourished here with billions of dollars wagered, generating more than $300 million in taxes and assessments, according to the
Advertisement
Type 'online casino in Massachusetts,' and you quickly realize how we're all one Google search away from trying our luck.
Seven states, including Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey, have legalized internet casino gaming, and proponents estimate that if Massachusetts levied a 20 percent tax, the state could generate $230 million to $275 million a year
in new revenue. (That's the same tax rate
as online-only sports betting, while land-based resort casinos are assessed at 25 percent.)
And with state lawmakers facing tough budget decisions this year, David Prestwood, a government affairs manager at DraftKings, knew exactly what to tell the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure.
'This money may be especially critical for Massachusetts in the face of anticipated federal funding cuts and reductions in state and local aid,'
he
said at last month's hearing.
Online casinos may seem no different than sports betting, but their appeal runs broader and deeper than placing a bet on a baseball game. And internet gambling is far different than going to a brick-and-mortar casino, which requires getting there and interacting with staff. Online, you can gamble in your pajamas.
'There's all these friction points where the player has the chance to think twice with about placing the next bet,' said Mark Stewart, a board member of the
Advertisement
Stewart, who is general counsel of The Cordish Companies, a Baltimore real estate and casino developer, testified virtually at the hearing, while Encore Boston Harbor president Jenny Holaday provided written testimony opposing online gaming and warned how it could result in a 'dramatic reduction in the associated taxes that Encore pays to the Commonwealth,' a sum that has totaled nearly $1 billion since the casino opened in 2019.
The owner of Encore Casino in Everett is pushing to stop a bill on Beacon Hill that would broadly legalize online gambling on slots and poker games.
John Tlumacki/Globe Staff
Encore employs about 3,300 workers, about a third of whom are part of Local 26.
A union representative also testified against the bills, citing an independent research analysis funded by the
(A
It's shaping up as a test of who has more clout on Beacon Hill — Encore and its coalition of boots-on-the-ground supporters in the unions and Everett, or tech companies that have deep pockets.
Brick-and-mortar casinos
could get in on the game, too. The legislation sets aside licenses for the state's existing casino operators, along with four licenses for internet gaming platforms. Along with slots, they'd allow poker, blackjack, craps, and even games with a live dealer.
But what about the
I can't imagine state Treasurer and Lottery chair, Deb Goldberg, being happy about online casinos, which could eat into lottery profits. The lottery in fiscal 2024 netted nearly
Advertisement
'If online gaming expands, we must ensure the Lottery is supported and stays competitive,' Goldberg said in a statement. 'Every dollar spent on private platforms could mean less for our cities and towns and early childhood education.'
Then there are concerns about addiction, with calls to the
surging
since sports betting was legalized.
Lia Nower, director of the Center for Gambling Studies at Rutgers University said what drives up the risk of problem gambling is giving people more options.
'There's a cumulative effect,' she said. 'The more things that you gamble on, the more often you gamble and the more venues in which you gamble, the higher your risk.'
In this digital era, online casinos may feel inevitable, yet internet gambling
is so new we don't really know how addictive it could be, especially among young bettors. Remember how we initially thought social media was just fun and games?
Critics of online gaming say it reduces barriers to problem gambling, compared with going to a brick-and-mortar casino.
Steve Helber/Associated Press
Yet the pressure will be intense from a gaming industry that's keen to keep expanding online. Boston-based
Why? Just follow the money, explains Nower.
'It's the cash cow for the industry,' she said.
State Senator Paul Feeney — who is sponsoring the online casino legislation with state Representative Daniel Cahill — said lawmakers are well aware the need to carefully weigh all the costs and benefits, in particular the investments made by land-based casinos which he described as 'sacrosanct.'
Advertisement
Yet there's also an urgency with the state facing budget pressures.
'I wouldn't say that anything is on a fast track,' said Feeney. 'There's a renewed interest in looking at how we can maximize tax revenue without broad-based tax increases on residents.'
We tend to give the Legislature a hard time for moving too slowly, but this time we shouldn't. At the very least, the state should conduct its own independent analysis, rather than relying on industry-funded studies to weigh the impact on existing land-based casinos and the lottery, and whether it would create a new class of problem gamblers.
Online gaming is too big of a gamble to not get this right.
Shirley Leung is a Business columnist. She can be reached at
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Analysts turn heads with new Alphabet stock price target after earnings
Analysts turn heads with new Alphabet stock price target after earnings originally appeared on TheStreet. Alphabet's solid earnings have investors feeling more confident in Google again. The company posted earnings of $2.31 per share on revenue of $96.43 billion, both ahead of Wall Street analysts' forecast. Search brought in $54.19 billion, while total ad revenue climbed to $71.34 billion, up 10% from last year. YouTube ads came in at $9.8 billion, slightly above expectations. Cloud was a standout, with revenue jumping 32% to $13.62 billion. Alphabet recently struck a deal with OpenAI to power ChatGPT using Google Cloud. Alphabet also raised its 2025 capital spending forecast to $85 billion, up from $75 billion in February, citing 'strong and growing demand for our Cloud products and services.' CFO Anat Ashkenazi said spending will likely increase again in 2026. The upbeat report helped push Alphabet stock () closer to its all-time high. Shares closed at $194.08 on July 25, up more than 13% over the past month. That mirrors a broader bounce in tech stocks as optimism grows around AI and cloud. So far this year, however, Alphabet shares are still trailing the market, up just 1.91% compared to the S&P 500's 8.62% gain. Analysts raise Alphabet's stock price targets Alphabet's latest earnings beat has prompted a wave of price target hikes from Wall Street analysts, though opinions split on how much upside is left. Bank of America analyst Justin Post raised his price target on Alphabet to $217 from $210 while maintaining a buy rating, following the company's better-than-expected second-quarter analyst highlighted that both Cloud and Search outperformed expectations, calling them 'a bright spot' in what he described as 'another strong' quarter that suggests AI use is growing the market. "Another stable qtr for Search results increases our confidence in the AI transition and should ease concerns on a potential revenue reset," the analyst wrote. "We acknowledge growing users of OpenAI but think Street could be underappreciating potential AI driven upside for Search (more use, better ads) and Cloud," he added. JPMorgan raised its price target on Alphabet to $232 from $200 and reiterated an overweight rating, according to The firm believes Alphabet's AI-driven demand and accelerating backlog make Google Cloud a "bigger driver of the bull case going forward." Other firms also lifted their targets following the earnings beat, though with a more cautious tone. Stifel raised its price target on Alphabet to $222 from $218, citing solid performance across Search, YouTube, and Cloud. However, the firm doesn't expect much follow-through in shares due to lingering concerns about Alphabet's long-term AI position and the DOJ overhang. UBS bumped its target to $202 from $192, calling the quarter Alphabet's 'cleanest' in a while, with strong fundamentals supporting earnings growth. Still, the firm kept a neutral rating, pointing to pressure on the stock's valuation from unresolved regulatory risks and rising competition in Search. Google still faces pressure Despite Alphabet's strong earnings, concerns around regulatory and competitive threats still exist. The company is currently facing a major antitrust lawsuit from the U.S. Department of Justice. In early August 2024, Judge Amit Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia accused Google of illegally maintaining a search engine monopoly by using exclusive agreements with device makers like Apple () .The DOJ is now pursuing remedies that include forced divestitures of Chrome and Android. The case is still pending, but could lead to structural changes or costly settlements if the DOJ prevails. Mehta said he aims to rule by August, Reuters reported. Beyond regulatory headwinds, Alphabet is also under mounting pressure from emerging AI competitors. More Wall Street Analysts: Veteran analyst drops surprise call on Tesla ahead of earnings Best Buy analyst, focused on earnings growth, reworks stock price target Microsoft analysts reboot stock price targets ahead of Q4 earnings As generative AI reshapes how users find information, traditional search is being challenged by AI tools like ChatGPT. These platforms offer more conversational responses, potentially reducing the need for users to 'Google.' There's also a risk that trade tensions could curb advertiser spending on Google's platforms, potentially impacting revenue growth. But when asked about the outlook, Alphabet's Chief Business Officer Philipp Schindler said it was too soon to make any calls. 'I think it's really too early to comment on anything happening in the second half of the year,' Schindler turn heads with new Alphabet stock price target after earnings first appeared on TheStreet on Jul 26, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jul 26, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Republicans plan to use threat of third Trump impeachment as key issue to boost their standing in midterm races
Republican strategists say they plan to make a major midterm talking point from the threat of a third impeachment against Donald Trump that could come if Democrats retake the House. 'We know what the stakes are in the midterm elections,' John McLaughlin, a Trump pollster, told NBC News. 'If we don't succeed, Democrats will begin persecuting President Trump again. They would go for impeachment.' Right now, Republicans hold an eight-seat advantage in the House, walling the president off from a third impeachment, but that could change if the Democrats surge in 2026, as the president's party typically suffers during midterm elections. Still, according to Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., who led the party's second impeachment against Trump over the January 6 insurrection, the Democrats themselves plan to focus more on what they see as the president's 'terrible agenda.' 'We've already impeached him twice,' Raskin told NBC. 'So obviously that's not a complete solution, given that he is able to beat the two-thirds constitutional spread. So I don't think anybody thinks that's going to be the utopian solution to our problems.' Both House impeachments — first for an alleged offer of quid pro quo with Ukraine to go after Joe Biden, then for the Capitol riot — did not have enough votes to secure convictions in the Senate. During the second Trump administration, the president has continued to face attempts to initiate new impeachment trials, including from Michigan Democrat Shri Thanedar in the spring and a June effort over the administration's Iran strikes, though none of these have come to pass. Impeachments may not be coming any time soon, but Republicans face a variety of other risks to their three-party majority control of the federal government. The president's job approval rating has dipped to 37 percent, according to Gallup, the lowest of this term and just above Trump's lowest-ever approval rating, driven by hemorrhaging support from independent voters. A majority of Americans also oppose his signature One Big, Beautiful Bill, which contains a series of tax cuts and restrictions on social programs like Medicaid. The party also continues to face fallout and internal division over the White House's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files scandal, in which Trump and his allies campaigned on releasing materials related to the notorious financier's sexual misconduct, only to backtrack as more information concerning Epstein and Trump's long-time friendship came to light. The president has lashed out at his own base for seeking information about the scandal, which he calls a Democratic 'hoax,' while House Speaker Mike Johnson effectively ended business in the lower house until after its upcoming summer recess to avoid Democratic amendments calling for the release of the files. Meanwhile, former White House ally (and GOP mega-donor) Elon Musk has vowed to form his own political party, in the face of disagreements with the Trump administration over spending policy and the Epstein saga. There could also be blowback to economic conditions if the Trump administration's repeatedly delayed double-digit tariffs take full effect on major U.S. trading partners.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell coming clean on Epstein case would be ‘a great service to the country'
Speaker Mike Johnson called on Jeffrey Epstein's accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, to come clean and told Americans that he "hoped" she could be trusted as he faces the growing uproar around the White House's handling of the investigation. Johnson appeared Sunday on NBC's Meet the Press, where moderator Kristen Welker asked him point-blank if the convicted sex-trafficker girlfriend of Epstein could be trusted to accurately testify about the crimes she and Epstein committed. Epstein was awaiting prosecution for sex trafficking underage girls after a previous conviction on similar charges when he died in federal custody. Maxwell has been thrust back into the spotlight as the MAGA base has grown frustrated with President Donald Trump and his administration's shutting down of the so-called Epstein files release. Last week, a top Department of Justice official met with Maxwell about the case. "Well, I mean, look; it's a good question. I hope so," Johnson told Welker in response. "I hope that she would want to come clean." "I hope she's telling the truth. She is convicted, she's serving a 20-year sentence for child sex trafficking. Her character is in some if she wants to come clean now, that would be a great service to the country. We want to know every bit of information that she has." The House Oversight Committee voted this week to issue a subpoena for Maxwell after the Justice Department announced its own plans to speak with her. Agency officials did so for nine hours between Thursday and Friday, after making a statement seeming to confirm that her testimony hadn't been aggressively sought before. Some have called Maxwell to testify and suggested she should be given a pardon for sharing what she knows about the Epstein case. She was convicted of sexual abuse against minors and sex trafficking for helping Epstein carry out crimes. Johnson touted the Oversight subpoena favorably Sunday, casting it as evidence that GOP leadership supported efforts aimed at transparency. The Trump administration turned speculation about Epstein's death and the so-called 'Client List' of his co-conspirators into a raging wildfire in early July. The Justice Department and FBI published a joint memo explaining that future releases from the files would not take place, and that the list of Epstein's accomplices was not found. Epstein was rumored to have cultivated personal relationships with many powerful men and institutions. Critics of the president have alleged that a cover-up is in the works regarding the Epstein files. Democrats have hammered the president for his reversal, and a pair of scoops from the Wall Street Journal have reported on the president's connections to Epstein, to Trump's fury. The newspaper reported the contents of a message allegedly penned by Trump to Epstein as part of a 50th birthday celebration in 2003, including allusions to a shared 'secret' between them. Trump firmly denied authoring the note, and sued the Journal and its reporters in response. A second article from the Journal days later reported that Attorney General Pam Bondi informed Trump in May that he was mentioned in the Epstein investigation multiple times, but it was not clear in what context. The White House called that story 'fake' and has repeatedly insinuated that Democrats including Joe Biden tampered with evidence while Trump was out of office. Being mentioned in the files does not mean wrongdoing, and hundreds of names are reportedly included. The lead GOP co-sponsor behind a House resolution that would force the Justice Department to release the entirety of its collected evidence related to Epstein said Sunday that his push was to help the convicted pedophile's victims and would only grow stronger in the coming weeks. Earlier on the same network, Rep. Thomas Massie appeared alongside the resolution's lead Democratic co-sponsor, Rep. Ro Khanna, as the two promoted a resolution that would force Attorney General Pam Bondi to release 'all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials' related to the Epstein and Maxwell investigations. Massie told Welker that 'the release of the Epstein files is emblematic of what Trump ran for' and explained that the president's MAGA base expected results. 'There seems to be a class of people beyond the law, beyond the judicial all thought that when Trump was elected, he would be the bull in the china shop and break that all up,' said Massie. Massie went on to say that the Trump administration had lost his trust on the issue after publicly supporting transparency around the investigation, then doing an abrupt about-face. The administration is now calling on its supporters to move on from the issue and focus on hashing out issues with the 2016 'Russiagate' investigation instead of Epstein. Top administration officials, including Vice President JD Vance, also spent months calling for the very releases the Justice Department says it won't authorize. 'People who were allegedly working on this weren't sincere in their efforts,' Massie said. 'Somebody should ask Speaker Mike Johnson, why did he recess Congress early so that he didn't have to deal with the Epstein issue?' 'Politics is the art of the doable. There's enough public pressure right now that we can get 218 votes and force this to a vote on the floor,' said Massie. He also firmly rejected a DOJ memo explaining the administration's position against further releases of information from the Epstein files, despite the very public promises of Bondi and others to do the opposite. In the memo, agency officials said that explicit imagery involving children was 'intertwined' throughout the files collected by the Justice Department. Some have said the files should not be released to protect sex-abuse victims of both Maxwell and Epstein. 'That's a straw man [argument],' Massie responded on Sunday, after Welker read part of the memo. 'Ro [Khanna] and I carefully crafted this legislation so that the victims' names would be redacted, and that no child pornography will be released.'
