Gambling operators have initiated concerted lobbying activity across the U.S. against proposed consumer protection legislation aimed at limiting gambling addiction, according to the not-for-profit Campaign for Accountability report.
The report, provided to The Guardian, details how prominent internet gambling industry operators have repeatedly lobbied against controls, which, according to specialists, can reduce addiction-related harm.
Key takeaways
● United States gambling operators actively lobby against consumer protection and addiction safeguards.
● The industry resists regulations on ads, bonuses, in-game bets, and data use.
● Some states uphold protections despite industry pushback; others drop proposed rules.
Since the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision letting states legalize sports betting, the market has expanded exponentially. Sports wagering is now legal in 39 states and Washington, D.C., and Americans placed an estimated $150 billion in bets in 2024.
During the boom, the gambling sector has defied a wide range of proposed regulations, from restrictions on advertising, bonuses, in-play betting, and data use.
In Arizona, DraftKings successfully fought off a suggested rule that would have banned the use of the word "free" in advertising unless the promotion involved no cost to the consumer. While addiction specialists warned such terminology could mislead consumers on the risks, DraftKings argued offering "free play" with deposit requirements was standard industry practice.
The Arizona Gaming Department finally approved an amended rule permitting such promos, provided they were accompanied by a clear terms and conditions disclosure.
The same campaigns went down in Minnesota. The Sports Betting Alliance (SBA) campaigned against an amendment to ban in-game bets, which are quick bets placed while an event is happening live.
Supporters of the ban cited the connection between in-game betting and addiction. Still, the SBA responded that such bets account for about half of all U.S. wagers and cautioned a ban could cut state tax revenues and make the black market more powerful.
Other measures also demonstrate mixed results
In Virginia, in 2021, a rule requiring sports betting sites to offer games that provide breaks in play was also rejected. Caesars and DraftKings protested the rule and offered voluntary "cooling-off" alternatives instead. DraftKings also objected to the rule's extension to sports wagering. DK argued players participate in fixed-odds events and not "games." The Virginia Lottery Board later dropped the proposed provision.
Not all industry efforts have paid off. In Massachusetts, companies like DraftKings sought to alter a regulation banning the use of sensitive personal information for targeted marketing. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission declined to make the changes sought, and the prohibitions stayed in place.
In New York, FanDuel objected to a proposal to hold operators responsible for deceptive language by their marketing representatives and opposed marketing bans close to college campuses. The New York State Gaming Commission endorsed both policies.
In Vermont, regulators set limits on bonuses and promotional credits despite Caesars' and FanDuel's objections. Caesars complained regulators don't typically set such limits, and FanDuel warned marketing restrictions would drive consumers to illegal sites or more permissive border states.
Maryland regulators also banned ads that imply gambling outcomes are "without risk," despite DraftKings' objection, which criticized the language as too broad.
Generally, the report describes a consistent pattern of industry resistance against regulators' attempts to curb gambling addiction, even though the operators integrated responsible gambling protocols into their day-to-day business operations.
