The city council in Washington, D.C. spent several hours listening to insights about legalizing iGaming from both supporters and detractors. While DC iGaming has gained momentum over the last year, this debate underscores that it’s still a contentious issue.
Advocates focused on addressing responsible gaming warned lawmakers that introducing real-money online casinos could make problem gambling even more widespread, particularly among vulnerable residents who can least afford financial losses. Legalization would expand the reach of gambling platforms rather than effectively safeguard consumers.
Les Bernal, national director of Stop Predatory Gambling, emphasized that regulation may actually enable operators to access a broader audience of potential users rather than limit risk. In other words, instead of protecting players from playing offshore, it would merely expose players to gambling that they may not have otherwise participated in.
“This is like putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank,” Bernal said during the hearing.
Executives representing major platforms such as FanDuel, DraftKings, and BetMGM pushed back on criticism by arguing that a regulated market would improve consumer safeguards.
When speaking at this recent hearing, representatives suggested that it’s estimated that Washington residents currently wager hundreds of millions of dollars each year on unregulated offshore casinos, where consumer protections are limited or even non-existent.
Licensed platforms provide built-in responsible gaming features that illegal sites do not offer, putting players at risk.
Additionally, keeping players within a controlled environment would generate tax revenue for the state, which is currently being lost to offshore sites.
Following the hearing, no immediate decision was made on the DC iGaming bill. The measure must still secure approval from the full 13-member city council before it can advance into law.
The legislation would permit licensed platforms to offer iGaming, including titles like blackjack, poker, roulette, and slots, to 21+ year olds located on non-federal property within Washington, D.C.
It introduces a 25% tax on operator earnings, with revenue directed toward behavioral health initiatives and local community programs.
Notably, the framework does not impose a limit on the number of licenses issued, reflecting an intent to foster a competitive marketplace. That would allow top operators like FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, and Caesars to set up shop in the state.
For D.C. players, instead of relying on offshore platforms that operate outside U.S. oversight, they would have the option to use regulated sites that are required to follow consumer protection rules, including age verification and responsible gambling tools.
One of the biggest potential advantages is the bill’s open-market structure. Because it does not limit the number of operator licenses, multiple companies would be able to enter the space and compete for players. That kind of competition often leads to better promotions and improved user experiences, featuring larger game selections.
At the same time, the added safeguards and funding for behavioral health programs could provide more support for players who may be at risk, which is another added benefit.
With that said, the future of iGaming legalization in Washington, D.C. is still up in the air. Despite this recent discussion, the issue remains divisive.
The proposal must go through further review and win approval from the full city council before it can advance. That may be difficult, as lawmakers continue to weigh concerns about the potential increase of problem gambling against the benefits of regulation and new tax revenue.
As a result, the bill is likely to face more debate going forward. There’s still a long way to go.
