In wake of the Supreme Court ruling on sports betting, state gambling regulators are "fighting suggestions by major sports leagues that gambling should be overseen at the federal level," according to James Glanz of the N.Y. TIMES. The Int'l Center for Gaming Regulation at UNLV, in a statement on behalf of state regulators in Nevada, Massachusetts, Louisiana and Michigan, said that "'coordinated action among jurisdictions' -- states and tribal agencies -- is the key to stopping illegal betting and possible corruption of the sports themselves." Although the regulators "welcomed 'strong support from federal-level enforcement agencies,' they took a direct swipe at the leagues, several of which have suggested that betting houses pay a fee to the leagues for the right to use their data for gambling." The leagues have "suggested that the fee would also help pay for new measures to protect against things like match fixing and improper wagering." Although the statement was "signed only by the gaming control commissioners of four states," other states "also appear to be at odds with the suggestion of federal oversight." An MLB spokesperson in a statement said that the league was "disappointed that state regulators had publicly expressed views on the issue." The spokesperson "called criticisms of the integrity fee 'casino propaganda.'" They added that MLB “would support regulation of sports betting by the states, but only if the states enact statutes and regulations that protect the interests of all stakeholders, not just the casinos" (N.Y. TIMES, 5/24).
IT'S GONNA BE A WHILE...: In Boston, Matt Murphy noted Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo "all but dashed the dreams of sports betting enthusiasts" hoping that state lawmakers "might move quickly to capitalize on the newly legal industry." He said that he "intends to take his time making a decision on whether to embrace sports gambling." DeLeo said that it "would be 'difficult' to see the House taking up a bill this session, and it's not a decision he wants to rush into." DeLeo: "There are so many questions that have to be answered." He also said that he has "heard a range of opinions from constituents and is only beginning to understand all the facets of sports betting that would have to be considered if it were to be legalized in Massachusetts" (BIZJOURNALS.com, 5/23). Also in Boston, Andy Rosen notes Massachusetts Gaming Commission Chair Stephen Crosby "emphasized the gaming commission has no position on whether sports betting should be legal" in the state. But he does "believe that commissions like his are best equipped to oversee the business where it is allowed." MLB and the NBA have requested that states create an integrity fee, but state regulators around the country have "argued that such a measure would 'increase the costs of legal sports betting, siphon much-needed tax revenues away from state coffers, and increase state regulatory burdens.'" Crosby said that the leagues are "entitled to argue they deserve a portion of the money wagered on their games," but he also said that there are "more effective ways to oversee gambling activities than a fee paid to sports leagues" (BOSTON GLOBE, 5/24).
NEW JERSEY SEEKS REPAYMENT: New Jersey State Senate President Stephen Sweeney said that he is "exploring a lawsuit against the leagues so the state can recoup legal fees and back tax revenue" after the Supreme Court ruled in the state's favor on sports betting. Sweeney said that the state spent $9M in "taxpayer money on the court case" since '11. He also said that the state's casinos and racetracks "lost out on 'roughly $700 million' in revenue that could have come from sports betting in that time -- money the state could have pulled tax dollars from." Sweeney said, "We should be pushing back: 'Look, you cost us a lot of money.'" In Newark, Brent Johnson notes Sweeney is "following the lead of the New Jersey Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association, the group that oversees horse racing in the state." Monmouth Park Racetrack operator Dennis Drazin said that the association is "prepping a federal lawsuit to seek" at least $100M in "damages from the league" (Newark STAR-LEDGER, 5/24). Sweeney also said that it is "'extortion' for the leagues to demand money in return for hosting honest games." Sweeney in a letter to state lawmakers wrote, “Essentially, the leagues are asking to be paid to allow games to be played fairly. ... Their demand begs the question of what they would now start doing to preserve the integrity of their games that they have not been doing for years." Sweeney noted that neither Nevada, where "sports betting has been done for years, nor any other state has ever paid the leagues an integrity fee" (AP, 5/23). Sweeney added that "giving the leagues some of the gaming revenue would not boost confidence in the integrity of the game." He said that it "would result in 'increased skepticism'" (POLITICO.com, 5/23).
HATCH CONTINUES FIGHT AGAINST: U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) in a special to SI wrote while "some may cheer" the Supreme Court ruling, he is "not one of them." Hatch: "Several professional sports organizations ... share my concerns with this court ruling." Unfettered sports betting is "not a harmless activity but an existential threat to the games we know and love." At stake here is "not just a couple hundred dollars in your office betting pool but the very reputation of sports." Congress "must act to protect the integrity of sports and guide states as they consider whether to embrace sports betting." Hatch: "I am working on legislation that will establish clear-cut, minimum standards for sports betting." No wager is "worth risking the reputation of American athletics" (SI.com, 5/23).
BRACE FOR IMPACT: Trail Blazers G C.J. McCollum said he has cost a "lot of people money, from winning games I shouldn’t win or underperforming in games I should have played better and you hear about it." He said he can "only imagine it will get a little worse" with legal sports betting, but "at the same time it’s great for the game in the sense that it’s going to bring in casual fans." McCollum said gambling “makes it more intriguing to watch as a fan." McCollum: “It will be good for the sport. Owners may not what to admit it (but) it’s going to make a lot of money" (“The Woj Pod,” 5/22). Meanwhile, Univ. of Kentucky AD Mitch Barnhart said that he would "do what was necessary to 'ensure the integrity of what we do,' including adding support staff as well as improving communication and education." UK has the "benefit of already having a person on staff who dealt with the myriad issues surrounding gambling and agents while working at the NCAA" in Exec Associate AD/Compliance & Ticket Operations Rachel Baker (LEXINGTON HERALD-LEADER, 5/24).
