Massachusetts iGaming Fight Deepens as Rival Polls Clash

A growing dispute over online casino legalization in Massachusetts is shaped by competing public opinion surveys, with recent polling showing different pictures of voter sentiment as lawmakers weigh several proposals.

Conflicting Surveys Split Opinion on Online Casinos in Massachusetts

One statewide survey conducted in mid-January by Emerson College Polling and funded by Stop iGaming in Massachusetts found that most residents remain skeptical about legalizing online casinos. More than half of respondents opposed legalization, while fewer than one in three supported it. Concerns about addiction and youth access dominated responses, with large majorities expressing worry that round-the-clock mobile gambling could have an impact on problematic play and expose minors to betting platforms.

The same survey pointed to limited confidence in the state’s ability to regulate the industry. Over half of participants indicated they had little or no trust in lawmakers to oversee iGaming, and many doubted existing technology could block underage users. Respondents also tended to believe that gambling companies would benefit more from legalization than the public.

A separate late-January poll from Beacon Research commissioned by the Sports Betting Alliance, reached almost the opposite conclusion. The survey reported that a clear majority of registered voters favored putting into action a regulated online casino market.

Supporters in the poll appeared motivated by concerns about unregulated offshore gambling, which many respondents viewed as riskier for consumers and children. The findings also showed that voters across party lines saw potential fiscal benefits, including tax revenue that could offset budget pressures.

Massachusetts iGaming Debate Pits Safeguards Against Social Risks

Industry advocates argue that legalization brings gambling into a monitored environment with consumer protections, citing the expansion of regulated sports betting platforms run by companies such as DraftKings and FanDuel in dozens of states. They maintain that oversight allows authorities to detect irregular activity, fund responsible-gaming programs, and limit the reach of illegal operators.

Opponents counter that online casino expansion could have unintended social and economic consequences.

Labor groups and at least one casino operator, Wynn Resorts, have warned lawmakers that digital gambling could draw customers away from physical venues, affecting jobs and local businesses. Officials have also raised concerns about possible impacts on lottery revenues that fund municipal services. The legislative outlook remains uncertain.

Several bills proposing regulated online casinos are still under committee review, with reporting deadlines in March. For now, the clash between polling narratives highlights how public opinion may rely less on the existence of gambling itself and more on how the issue is framed — either as a consumer-protection measure or a public-health risk.