Encore Slams Online Gambling Bill as a ‘Bad Bet,’ Warning Mass. Lawmakers It Will Cost Jobs and Gut Casinos
Massachusetts lawmakers opened the first hearing on a sweeping online gambling bill to a fierce warning from Encore Boston Harbor, which blasted the proposal as an economic threat that would “cannibalize” the state’s brick-and-mortar casinos and wipe out thousands of jobs.
The flashpoint came as legislators on the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies weighed whether to legalize full online casino gaming — a move supporters say will raise revenue and bring underground gambling “out of the shadows,” but opponents argue will gut the casino industry and fuel addiction across the state.
The bill at the center of the fight
Filed by Rep. David Muradian, the proposal would:
-
Give the Massachusetts Gaming Commission full regulatory control
-
Impose a 15% tax on online gaming revenue
-
Restrict online gambling licenses to existing casino operators
-
Allow digital slots, poker, blackjack, and other casino-style games statewide
Massachusetts already allows online sports betting.
This bill would go much further.
Encore calls iGaming an economic “catastrophe,” predicts nearly 1,800 job losses
Encore Boston Harbor submitted a blistering letter to lawmakers ahead of the hearing, warning that legalized online casinos could devastate the state’s gaming economy.
Eileen McAnneny, Encore’s government relations director, told lawmakers:
-
iGaming would cost 1,800 people their jobs
-
The state would lose $450 million in GDP, tax revenue, and related economic activity
-
Gambling addiction costs would rise dramatically
Her bottom line was blunt:
“Internet casino gambling is a bad bet for Massachusetts.”
Encore also sent a union representative to reinforce the argument that online gaming would hollow out in-person casino traffic, endangering union jobs and shrinking local revenue.
Lawmakers now face a high-stakes political choice — protect casinos or embrace online revenue
Behind the scenes, Beacon Hill insiders say the battle isn’t simply casinos vs. technology — it’s a war between two competing visions for the state’s gambling future.
Supporters argue:
-
Massachusetts is already losing revenue to illegal offshore gambling
-
Other Northeastern states are cashing in
-
Regulated online casinos could generate millions in taxes
Opponents counter:
-
Casinos are major employers with heavy local investment
-
Online gaming could erode casino-based tax agreements
-
Addiction risks could produce a public health crisis the state isn’t prepared for
Legislators must now decide whether Massachusetts doubles down on physical casinos — or pivots toward digital gambling with potentially massive economic consequences.
Arguments from the bill’s supporters
Muradian told lawmakers the goal is regulation, not expansion:
-
Bring illegal online gambling “into the light”
-
Use age and location verification to protect players
-
Require monitoring for problem gambling
-
Keep tax revenue in Massachusetts rather than “sending it overseas”
PENN Entertainment, owner of Plainridge Park Casino, supports legalization — but only if all online licenses remain tied to physical casinos, a compromise meant to prevent market dilution.
Problem gambling concerns escalate
A new UMass study shows that sports betting legalization has already contributed to rising addiction rates:
-
Problem gambling among Massachusetts bettors rose from 20.9% (2022) to 28% (2024)
Former state representative David Nangle, a recovering gambling addict, urged lawmakers to reject the bill:
“There’s no Narcan for gambling. Don’t turn every cellphone in Massachusetts into a casino.”
Harvard public health professor Shekhar Saxena warned that online gambling is “10 times more harmful” than traditional forms because it is constant, private, and available 24/7.