Coalition Presses Congress for Federal Sports Betting Rules

Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Rep. Paul Tonko of New York joined addiction specialists and families of gamblers in Washington on Sept. 23 to launch "Truth and Integrity: The Movement for Gambling Reform," a national campaign seeking federal minimum standards for an industry that currently faces no national rules.

The campaign brings together the two lawmakers, the Public Health Advocacy Institute at Northeastern University and a new group called Friends and Family of Gamblers (FFOG), whose members include parents whose children died by suicide after developing a gambling addiction. The coalition is pressing for changes at both the federal and state level, and it frames the effort as consumer protection rather than prohibition.

What the SAFE Bet Act would require

The legislative centerpiece is the SAFE Bet Act, which would set conditions on states that offer sports betting. Under the bill, operators would face restrictions on certain advertising practices, and would have to run affordability checks before accepting larger wagers. The measure also addresses deposits, self-exclusion programs, and the use of technology to track customers and build personalized promotions.

Blumenthal has separately sponsored the Prediction Markets Security and Integrity Act, introduced in March with Sen. Andy Kim, which would create federal consumer safeguards for contracts offered by prediction market platforms while returning regulatory authority over those markets to individual states. The bill covers underage use, fraud, market manipulation, and the conditions under which bets are settled.

At the launch event, Blumenthal argued that gambling companies, including sportsbook operators and prediction market platforms, are profiting from vulnerable customers. Tonko framed the goal as making "a possibly addictive product" considerably safer for consumers.

A 60 percent rise in problem gambling where sportsbooks are legal

Dr. Harry Levant, director of gambling policy at the Public Health Advocacy Institute and a person in recovery from gambling addiction himself, said the rate of gambling addiction has risen by at least 60 percent in states where sports betting is legal — a figure he cited for Massachusetts and comparable markets.

Levant told New England Public Media that operators are "using A.I. to deliver a fundamentally different, inherently dangerous, and defectively designed product that is being consumed by the public in ways for which it was not intended." He described the sale of gamblers' personal data and the growth of in-game betting — wagers placed on individual plays during a game — as key drivers of harm.

According to the New York Times, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission is examining how sportsbooks such as DraftKings use artificial intelligence to identify customers who are losing money and encourage them to bet more. Advocates also accuse professional sports leagues and the NCAA, now led by former Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, of minimizing the mental health risks of betting by partnering with gambling companies.

"The movement is just the beginning," Levant said. "It is a cry from the nation that we've had enough."

State legislatures move first

Several states are already weighing pullback measures, and the campaign intends to push for more. In Massachusetts, the Bettor Health Act would ban live in-game betting and cap how much money a customer can lose. Illinois folded gambling disorder into its Substance Use Disorder Act in July, making compulsive gamblers eligible for state-funded treatment without a co-occurring substance diagnosis, though the law came with no new money attached.

That gap between legalization and treatment capacity is a recurring theme. A federal grant program, the POINTS Act, would create the first dedicated national funding stream for gambling disorder treatment, but it has yet to pass despite bipartisan introduction.

Industry pushback

The American Gaming Association opposes additional federal involvement, arguing that sports betting is already regulated by state and tribal authorities and that a national framework would weaken that system. The association has also argued that prediction markets offering sports-related contracts operate outside state gambling frameworks and should face the same oversight as traditional sportsbooks.

Prediction market operators counter that they fall under federal commodities regulation rather than state gambling law — a dispute already playing out in New York's lawsuit against Kalshi, which seeks penalties of up to $36 billion over allegedly unlicensed wagering.

Whether the new campaign translates into votes is unclear. Congress has not moved on either bill, and the industry's state-by-state regulatory model has so far survived repeated challenges in court.