The “Missourians Against the Deceptive Online Gambling Amendment” political committee was formed 10 September. And according to records on the Missouri ethics commission (MEC) website, the casino giant funded the campaign 13 September. The company made three separate contributions under the names of its casinos.
Tropicana St. Louis, which is now the Horseshoe Casino, and the Isle of Capri Casino Booneville each donated $1.3m. Harrah’s North Kansas City contributed $1.4m.
Caesars so far is the only casino company in the state to take a clear stance on the issue of legal Missouri sports betting.
The initiative, which will be listed as Amendment 2 on the November ballot, survived a legal challenge last week. It would legalise statewide digital sports betting with platforms tethered to existing casinos and professional sports venues/teams. It was the brainchild of the state’s professional sports teams, in particular the St. Louis Cardinals.
Digital platforms support initiative
The proposal has also created a rift between traditional casino companies and digital wagering companies. Amendment 2 has the backing of digital wagering companies like DraftKings and FanDuel. Until last week, the state’s casinos had been silent since the initiative petition surfaced.
The Sports Betting Alliance (SBA) is comprised of BetMGM, DraftKings, Fanatics Sportsbook and FanDuel. The SBA last week rolled out its first ad. None of the companies have a physical presence in the state and are supporting the initiative.
The committee supported by the SBA, Winning for Missouri Education, was created in January. So far, according to MEC records, DraftKings and FanDuel have contributed a combined $9.525m. The pair made combined contributions of $2.5m in January and $1m in March. DraftKings added another $3.525m 15 August, and FanDuel added an additional $1.5m 13 September.
Issue has stalled in legislature
Legal Missouri sports betting has been a topic of discussion in the state legislature for more than five years. But because Senator Denny Hoskins wanted to tie it to legal video lottery terminals (VLTs), the issue has stalled every session. Three years ago, the casinos and sports teams formed a coalition and lobbied for a bill together. Under that proposal, each casino company would have been entitled to up to three skins, or platforms. But under the initiative proposal, each company would get one skin.
Boyd Gaming, Caesars, and Penn Entertainment each have multiple casinos in the state. If the initiative passes, Caesars and Penn would be entitled to one skin vs. the three that were proposed in the state legislature. Boyd Gaming has two casinos in Missouri, and would get one platform vs. two.
Religious groups also oppose legal Missouri sports betting
According to the “No on Amendment 2” website, proponents are promising that tax dollars from wagering would be used to support education, but “because of special loopholes written into the measure, there’s no guarantee that a single penny would go to the State to fund schools.”
The “no” campaign launched its website last week and posted its first advertisement.
Caesars and the “no” committee aren’t the only ones opposing Amendment 2. A search of X reveals that religious are also strongly opposed:
Problem gambling advocates oppose the Missouri sports betting measure, as well.
Original article: https://igamingbusiness.com/sports-betting/caesars-funding-no-missouri-sports-betting/
