Share
The Maine legislature is considering legalizing online casino play in the state for the second time in as many years, with a hearing in a House committee kicking off the action for 2025. Testimony during the hearing featured Maine residents, state officials, and gambling company representatives. However, the majority of that testimony was in opposition to the bill.
The hearing did not produce any movement on the bill which could encounter some of the same resistance that ultimately led to the failure of the 2024 proposal. Concerns voiced by those participating in the hearing voiced identical issues like resistance to expanding tribal exclusivity over gaming in Maine.
This effort is also beginning much later in the year than the 2024 push, which began last February.
Committee receives comments on LD1164
The Maine House of Representatives’ Committee on Veterans and Legal Affairs featured multiple individuals sharing comments on online slots.
Among the participants in the hearing were the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Ambureen Rana. Also testifying in of LD1164 was Joseph Tyrrell, the Vice President of Government Relations for the Northeast Region for Caesars Entertainment.
Caesars already offers online sports betting in Maine through a partnership with three of the Wabanaki Nations whose live within the borders of Maine. Tyrrell’s testimony was the full balance of allies of Rana’s bill that spoke on the day.
Opposition testimony cites diverse concerns
Maine residents who submitted testimony included healthcare professionals who cited concerns about increases in problem gambling if regulated online casino play becomes available in the state. Additionally, other speakers expressed fears that legal online casino play would take business away from brick-and-mortar gambling establishments in Maine.
Steve Silver of the Maine Gambling Control Unit (MGCU), the state’s regulatory body for gaming, explained that his opposition was to limiting licensing for iGaming to current tribal casino operators within Maine. A member of FanDuel’s Government Relations staff, Michael Ventre, voiced a similar reason for the company opposing LD1164, stating a preference for a more open market.
Silver added that the LD1164’s provision putting iGaming under the purview of the director of the MGCU represents a departure from existing law. Also complicating that situation is recent animosity between the current director of the MGCU, Milton Champion, and MGCU employees.
The matter of tribal exclusivity could be the breaking point for a second straight year, though.
Familiar challenges face LD1164
In 2024, LD1777 came five votes shy of proceeding to Gov. Janet Mills’ desk after being approved by the Maine Senate. LD1777 could have the same effect as Rana’s bill with an important caveat; it required a statewide referendum to authorize the gaming expansion.
LD1164 for 2025 has no referendum provision but is in most other ways extremely similar to LD1777. Its identical treatment of tribal exclusivity in regulated online casino play might send it to a similar fate as LD1777.
While Mills never commented on LD1777 specifically, she has opposed multiple other pieces of legislation to expand tribal governance in Maine. Veto fears might sway more legislators against LD1164 as well.
If LD1164 does become law in its current form, gaming licensees could simply expand their existing relationships with online gambling companies in Maine. That could give Mainers access to the DraftKings Casino, although nothing in the bill mandates that licensees partner with the same companies for iGaming that they do for sports wagering.
Monday’s hearing was the first step toward those hypotheticals becoming reality. At this stage, the opponents of LD1164 seem more abundant and active than the bill’s ers.
