Addiction experts fear the consequences if California legalizes sports betting

Addiction experts fear the consequences if California legalizes sports betting

Because that’s what the US Supreme Court decided in 2018 States could legalize sports betting, California – with 40 million people and numerous professional teams – was the great white whale that eluded gambling companies and tribal communities that host casinos. At stake is $3.1 billion in annual sales, according to an industry consulting firm.

So it's no surprise that voters this fall will be faced with not one, but two ballot proposals aimed at cornering California's sports betting market. Although neither appears to enjoy strong public support, gambling addiction experts are far more concerned about one than the other.

Proposal 26, backed by some of the state's largest tribal casino owners, would allow sports betting, but only at existing brick-and-mortar establishments that already offer gambling and at horse racing venues. In contrast, Proposal 27 designed and funded by nationwide corporate gambling sites like DraftKings, FanDuel and BetMGM, would legalize online sports betting and essentially open the door for people to bet on games — and the athletes and games in them — whether they're sitting in the stands or on a couch.

Any measure would likely lead to an increase in gambling problems and gambling addiction, but mental health experts say the sheer ease of betting online — on scores, player scores, the number of penalties in a game and almost everything else related to a sporting event — increases the likelihood of trouble.

“You don’t get addicted to season-long fantasy football, you get addicted to in-game betting,” Dr. Timothy Fong, psychiatrist and co-director of the UCLA Gambling Studies Program. “Instead of placing a bet on the Rams-Chargers game, I can now place an infinite amount right from my phone.”

Sports betting is already legal in some form 36 states and Washington, D.C., and calls to gambling hotlines increased Michigan, Connecticut, new York, and other states after allowing this form of gambling. The National Problem Gambling Helpline Network reported a Increase by 45% in annual inquiries in 2021, when 11 states went live with a new form of sports betting.

Although gambling addiction does not involve the use of drugs or chemicals, it does involve stimulation of brain regions, as is the case with other addictions. The American Psychiatric Association classifies gambling as such This puts it in the same category as tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, cannabis and opioids. Research shows that mesolimbic dopamine, which produces feelings of reward and pleasure in the brain, is released in larger amounts in pathological gamblers than in people in control groups. Players become addicted to this reward.

For many states, the temptation is obvious: tax revenue. In 2020, Pennsylvania collected $38.7 million from gambling – three quarters of which come from mobile sports betting. California is nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates The state will collect hundreds of millions in taxpayer money each year, but probably no more than $500 million a year if Proposition 27 passes. The Office bound State revenue from Proposition 26 amounts to tens of millions of dollars per year. Some of that money would come from taxing 10% of sports betting at racetracks, and some could come from tribal casinos, which would have to renegotiate contracts with the state.

Californians have been bombarded with competing ads for weeks the most expensive ballot initiative fight in the country, at $400 million and rising. The fight may have turned off voters. A current survey The UC-Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies found that 42% of likely voters opposed Proposition 26, compared to 31% for it. Support for Proposition 27 was even lower, with 53% of likely voters opposed and just 27% in favor.

Both ballot measures provide limited new resources to help people with gambling problems or addictions and do not require the state to improve tracking or treatment.

Proposition 26's drafters included a provision to direct 10% of sports betting revenue from horse racing tracks to the state Department of Health, with a portion of that money set aside "for the prevention and treatment of gambling problems," according to materials provided to KHN by supporters of the initiative. But racetracks have been in decline for decades, and their share of sports betting would be that smallest disc of the cake. Additionally, the amount that could be generated by tribal casinos is uncertain because it depends on whether new contracts require additional payments and direct funds for treatment programs.

Kathy Fairbanks, a spokeswoman for the Vote Yes on Proposition 26 campaign, noted that tribes are already contributing approximately $65 million a year to the state Gambling Control Commission, which finances it Problem Gambling Office. “Before tribes began casino gambling in California more than 20 years ago, there was no dedicated funding for problem gambling,” Fairbanks said. California has had racetrack betting since the 1930s, and the lottery began in 1985.

Proposition 27 would require participating companies to pay 10% of gross gaming revenue to the state. Of that, 85% would be earmarked for homeless and mental health programs, including programs to combat problem gambling.

Nathan Click, a spokesman for the Yes on 27 campaign, said the initiative would introduce "the strictest gaming safeguards for online sports betting in the country" and require staff at every authorized gambling platform to be trained on how to identify problem gambling.

However, psychologists say online betting is immediate, accessible and almost effortless. Anyone with a phone, tablet, or computer can get started with a credit card. And there is virtually no limit to the bets that can be placed on a single game, even while the game is being played.

“People don’t get addicted to Mega Millions,” Fong said. “They become addicted to scratch cards with more bets per minute.”

One way the gambling industry entices people to keep playing is through promotional credits, which essentially allow them to start betting without spending their own money. Rick Benson, founder of Algamus Gambling Treatment Services, said: “ free play “Offers are not only common in casinos, but are also heavily promoted on websites and social media, potentially misleading new players into thinking they have nothing to lose.

That makes Proposition 27 a bigger problem. Researchers from McGill University and the Oregon Research Institute have found that online gaming is a goal to behavioral disorders, including problem gambling, which is characterized by continued gambling despite negative consequences for a person's life, or to outright addiction, which is uncontrollable. Gambling can lead to ruinous consequences such as bankruptcy, mental and family problems, and substance use.

Because Proposition 26 restricts betting to casinos and racetracks, it could moderate activity. “Studies have shown that participation in gambling is somewhat linked to access,” said Robert Jacobson, executive director of the California Council on Problem Gambling. “Participation rates increase once people are within 50 to 60 miles of a casino.”

Still, it's not clear how Proposition 26 would affect the spread of gambling, since the provision also clears the way for tribal casinos to add Las Vegas-style games like roulette and craps.

It's also not clear how big the gambling problem is in California, especially because the state Office on Problem Gambling hasn't updated its data since 2006. In August, a state audit found that the office, which has an annual budget of about $8.5 million, " has not effectively evaluated its programs.” The office does not know how many California residents are suffering or have recently suffered from gambling-related problems.

However, addiction researchers believe the problem persists and around 4% of residents suffer from either gambling problems or a gambling addiction. That equates to about 1.6 million Californians who may have a gambling problem, although the number could be much higher less than 1 in 10 People with gambling disorders seek treatment.

The two initiatives would amend the constitution to allow lawmakers to create new sports betting laws. State authorities would then have to develop regulations for the implementation of sports betting, which, according to experts, could be exploited by gambling interests.

“The voices,” Jacobson said, “are just the beginning of the activity.”

This story was produced by KHN that published California Health Line an editorially independent service California Health Foundation.

.