Share
Maryland lawmakers will consider online casino legislation in 2025 after all.
Sen. Ron Watson tells PlayUSA that he and Del. Vanessa Atterbeary pre-filed the online casino bill that passed the House last year.
Atterbeary’s bill already came out as HB0017.
Watson now thinks Maryland may need online casino revenue to help address a $2.7 billion deficit in fiscal year 2026, the largest faced by the state in nearly 20 years.
Watson recently joined the Senate Spending Affordability Committee, where he heard about the deficit.
The reason I changed my mind is because the revenue picture has worsened and the governor stated that all options are on the table.
Maryland State Senator Ron Watson
“This is an option. Prudence dictates that this is available should the need arise as an alternative to raising taxes.”
Reassessing need for referendum key to Maryland iGaming effort
At the end of last session, Watson said he didn’t plan on filing an iGaming bill in 2025 because legalization requires a voter referendum that couldn’t take place until the November 2026 general election.
So given it couldn’t get final approval in 2025 anyway, he thought his Senate colleagues could use a year off on the issue after a feisty hearing last session.
Before he began pushing for iGaming legislation two years ago, Watson went to Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown and asked for his opinion on whether or not online casino needed a referendum. Brown decided that iCasino was an expansion on gambling that required going in front of voters.
However, an argument can be made that slot machines and casino games such as blackjack, craps and roulette already are played legally at Maryland casinos. So putting them online is merely a different distribution method of the same games.
Watson believes it comes down to whether online slots differ substantially from physical slots.
“I don’t think his mind is made up,” Watson said of Brown. “He’s very open-minded. If there was a new or different type of evidence to present to him, he would weigh it objectively and render his decision.”
Obstacles still present for Maryland online casino legislation
When the Maryland legislature held hearings on iGaming legislation last year, two of the six casinos in the state opposed.
Many Maryland Live! (The Cordish Cos.) employees provided faces to the opposition, expressing concerns that online gaming could negatively impact their jobs and their families. Oceans Downs Casino (Churchill Downs) also opposed.
However, the House still passed iCasino legislation and included online casino revenue in its budget proposal. Atterbeary and the House saw online casino as a sustainable revenue source to support the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future Fund.
Maryland Senate President Bill Ferguson was a hard no on taking up iGaming legalization last year. He will need convincing.
Watson said that Gov. Wes Moore also has concerns.
The governor is still concerned about the problem gaming aspect and that problem gaming would become exacerbated.
“But in my conversations with him, I said we’ve already had these conversations when it came to the lottery and when it came to sports betting. Adults should have the ability to do what they want to do with their discretionary income. Other states are moving on this and we should not be left behind.”
Financial need is a great motivator
Last year, the Senate didn’t need to consider the online casino legislation passed by the House because it came up with a balanced budget without iCasino revenue.
It might prove more challenging for the Senate to ignore untapped revenue from regulating iGaming this year.
According to projections, Maryland online casino would produce more than $500 million in state revenue in year one, possibly nearing a billion at market maturity.
Watson believes the final need for revenue will play a large role in determining Maryland online casino chances this year.
“Many people are working on bills to reduce the deficit as we speak,” Watson said. “I’m not on the budget committee, so I’m not privy to all of them. Soon after the session starts, we’ll start looking at those bills and know if that is good enough or we need to go even further.”
Maryland’s legislative session starts Jan. 8. If Maryland needs revenue, Watson said he and Atterbeary want their colleagues to have a readily available option that doesn’t raise taxes.
“As we discuss how to close the gap, we wanted to make sure they had an option ready to go that already has been vetted through the House.”
