\nWhile 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 that 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,” the Republicans wrote.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\nCurrently, only seven states permit online slot machines and table games: New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Delaware, West Virginia, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. The three lawmakers cited ongoing iGaming gross gaming revenue increases in those states while in-person play grows, albeit at a slower rate.<\/span><\/p>\nThe representatives said that while they support iGaming, any implementation “must not come at a cost” to the state’s current casinos and racinos that employ thousands of Ohioans. \u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\nOnline lottery sales and\/or instant gameplays are offered in just nine states: Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Dakota, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Washington, DC, allows iLottery, too.<\/span><\/p>\nThe Ohio Republicans supportive of iLottery say allowing online gameplay has only supplemented lottery sales and increased revenue for the programs they benefit.<\/span><\/p>\n\n
The trio of Republicans was joined by Rep. Rose Sweeney (D-Westlake) in supporting iGaming and iLottery, though she urged that it must be done in a way that doesn’t negatively impact brick-and-mortar casinos or lottery retailers.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n“The reality is that many other states are moving in this direction and Ohioans are already using the illicit market. Lawmakers should accept that it is very likely that these expansions are only a matter of time and move forward in the best interest of the State of Ohio. As technology evolves and society progresses, so too should our laws,” Sweeney wrote.<\/span><\/p>\nPanel Not Unified<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n Other lawmakers serving on the Study Commission on the Future of Gaming in Ohio weren’t so sure iGaming and iLottery are needed, at least at this juncture. Manning said Ohio “must proceed with caution” in discussing such gambling, as the verticals “potentially have more addictive qualities.”<\/span><\/p>\n\n
State Sen. Al Landis (R-Dover) said his position “is to maintain the status quo and keep the brick-and-mortar sites rather than have the state expand into iLottery and other forms of virtual gaming.” Landis also cited addiction concerns as his primary reason for opposition.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\nState Sen. William DeMora (D-Columbus) also opposed online gaming and lottery play. Along with addiction worries, DeMora opined that iGaming and iLottery would negatively hurt business as retail facilities.<\/span><\/p>\n“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,” DeMora wrote.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Some Ohio lawmakers want to legalize iGaming and iLottery.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":325306,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[19,13699],"tags":[81871,82332,86070,81911,81872,13720],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Ohio Republicans Voice Support for iGaming, iLottery<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n