Legislators Split on Legalized Ohio iGaming, iLottery in New Study
A new study on the future of Ohio gaming is split as to whether moving ahead with the legalization of iGaming and iLottery is beneficial.
A recently published 354-page study on the future of Ohio gaming saw its bipartisan participants split on support for iGaming and iLottery legalization in the Buckeye State.
The Study Commission on the Future of Gaming in Ohio was commissioned during the state’s 134th General Assembly and published the report following several months of public meetings. It consisted of three members of the House of Representatives, three from the Senate, the Chairperson of the State Lottery Commission, the Chairperson of the Ohio Casino Control Commission, and the chairperson of the State Racing Commissions.
Support for iGaming, iLottery
Several participants in the study publicly shared their support for the legalization of iGaming in Ohio, no more so than three Republican House of Representatives members.
In a joint letter, Republican House Representatives Jay Edwards (R-94), Jeff LaRe (R-73), and Cindy Abrams (R-29) urged expansion of gaming through iGaming and iLottery legislation in the 2025 session.
“While we understand their hesitation to expand due to an uncertain impact, we believe that iLottery and iGaming could be a net benefit to the state of Ohio. Looking at other states who have implemented either or both iLottery and iGaming, we see significant increases to tax revenues generated with greater participation but also that in-person sales continued to increase. That can largely be contributed to more people participating in the market on their phones and becoming more comfortable/knowledgeable about doing it at a physical location. For example, Pennsylvania, which launched iLottery in 2018, saw an increase of almost 20% of sales in traditional retail stores,” the Representatives wrote.
Connecticut, in its second year of iGaming operation, experienced a 44.7% increase in its overall gaming market in 2023. Michigan, which legalized iGaming in 2021, is also home to the largest online gaming market in the U.S. at $3.6 billion, the Representatives explained in the study.
Ohio could see a similar boost to its gaming industry if iGaming is legalized.
“These tax revenue benefits to the state and funding that could be provided to our K-12 education system cannot be overlooked.”
They were joined in support by Rep. Bride Rose Sweeney (D-16), who wrote in the study that the general assembly “should give serious consideration to iGaming and iLottery with extensive vetting through the legislative committee process.”
Sweeney noted that the Legislative Service Commission estimated Ohio could generate between $500 million to $650 million in annual tax revenue if iGaming is legalized.
More support for iLottery was evident in the study, as six study participants supported the new form of gaming. Sen. Nathan Manning (R-13) expressed his support for iLottery’s legalization moving forward, citing the potential move as one of “common sense.”
“In the short term, I do believe we should move forward with a portion of SB 269 and allow Lottery to offer draw games and multi-state games online. These products are already available online through third party venders, and it is common sense to allow Lottery to offer them directly to consumers,” he wrote.
Michelle B. Gillcrist, J.D., director of the Ohio Lottery Commission, also supported the legalization of iLottery in the state.
Detractors Point to Problem Gaming, Cannibalization
While Manning did have strong words of support for the legalization of iLottery, he was much more wary of potential iGaming legislation.
“Other states have shown that these online products are very popular to the consumer and they also bring in substantial revenue to the state. However, we must proceed with caution, as some of these products may need more vetting since they are more easily accessible to the consumer and could potentially have more addictive qualities,” he wrote.
Any gaming expansion, he warned, needs to be balanced with additional investments into problem gaming resources.
Others in the study were more blunt in their opposition to iGaming. Sen. William P. DeMora (D-25) said iGaming and iLottery legalization may cause undue harm to the existing industries. The state’s large network of corner stores, gas stations, bars, restaurants, and mom-and-pop business rely on the income from selling state lottery tickets, he explained.
“Additionally, Ohio has some of the premier casinos in the country, including Hollywood Casino-Columbus in my district. The casino gaming industry employs hundreds of people with good, union jobs. We cannot risk the position of these critical institutions by making them irrelevant, with Ohioans who want to gamble turning to their phones instead of supporting brick-and-mortar stores,” he wrote.
Sen. Al Landis (R-31) also called for the state to maintain the “status quo” and keep the current brick-and-mortar facilities in the state. The Senator also seemed hesitant to delve into legalized iGaming, preferring to resist expansion into “other forms of virtual gaming.”
Robert Linnehan
Covering regulatory developments in online gambling. Editing/writing/creating a newsletter for readers across all formats.
