Maryland online casino bill causes heated debate during hearing

Article by : Charles Perrin Jan 31, 2025

• 
• 

Maryland’s prospective online casino bill appears to be splitting opinion.

A 3-hour hearing was held earlier this week where there was a chance to listen to both sides of the debate, and cannibalization was pinpointed as the major concern.

Sen. Ron Watson, who is co-sponsoring the bill with Del. Vanessa Atterbeary, labeled cannibalization as a “fallacy” even though in some states iCasino revenues have surpassed their land-based counterparts.

There was an even split between those defending and opposing SB340, and both sides gave impassioned arguments.

Among the bill’s opponents, included The Cordish Companies, who were quick to raise the cannibalization worry, despite already offering iCasino in Pennsylvania.

The company’s representative Mark Stewart insisted that Maryland shouldn’t embrace online casinos.

He said: “We could make a tremendous amount of money on legal iGaming in Maryland. 

“But we are telling you not to do it because it is bad for Maryland, it is bad for us and it is bad for our team members.”

Despite the Cordish Companies’ shortcomings about Maryland iCasinos, Pennsylvania serves to prove that digital gambling and retail revenues can co-exist.  The latest revenue report noted an 11% increase in land-based slots and an 18% uptick in online gambling revenue.

Maryland, as we reported earlier this month, is trying to plug a $2.7 billion financial hole, and introducing online casinos is seen as a potential avenue with the state facing its biggest deficit in over 20 years.

Cannibalization may not seem new, but it is driving the debate, and both parties need to bridge the gap to stop things from escalating further.