Missouri Group Opposes Statewide Sports Betting Expansion

Missouri Group Launches Campaign to Oppose Statewide Sports Betting Expansion

As the battle over legalizing sports betting in Missouri intensifies, a new opposition group, Missourians Against the Deceptive Online Gambling Amendment (MADOGA), has launched a fierce campaign against the proposed Amendment 2, which seeks to legalize sports wagering across the state. The group’s move comes on the heels of a recent court decision that dismissed a legal challenge to remove the measure from the November ballot, setting the stage for a high-stakes showdown that could reshape Missouri’s gambling landscape.

MADOGA Takes a Stand Against Sports Betting Legalization

The proposed Amendment 2, which would permit statewide sports betting, has garnered significant attention, but not without controversy. MADOGA, an opposition group dedicated to blocking the amendment, argues that the measure is misleading and primarily serves the interests of out-of-state online gambling corporations such as FanDuel and DraftKings. According to MADOGA spokesperson Brooke Foster, “Amendment 2 is a bad deal for Missouri. This deceptive measure was written by and for the financial benefit of its out-of-state corporate sponsors and funders.”

MADOGA’s stance reflects a broader concern that the amendment would prioritize corporate profits over the well-being of Missouri residents. The group claims that the legalization effort is heavily influenced by significant donations from these gambling giants, who have collectively poured $10 million into supporting legalization through the Winning for Missouri Education campaign, which also enjoys backing from several of Missouri’s major sports teams.

Concerns Over Potential Tax Loopholes and Economic Impact

One of MADOGA’s primary arguments against Amendment 2 is the potential for tax loopholes that could undermine the state’s revenue. The group points to a state fiscal analysis suggesting that sports betting could yield negligible tax benefits due to existing deductions for promotional credits, free play, and federal taxes. MADOGA cited Kansas as a cautionary example, where a similar sports betting law resulted in the state collecting just $1,000 in taxes in February 2023 because of these deductions.

Foster emphasized that the amendment’s vague language could enshrine these loopholes in Missouri’s constitution, allowing operators to sidestep taxes and leaving the state with little to no financial benefit. “This measure puts Missouri at risk of enshrining tax avoidance in our constitution. It’s written to benefit gambling companies, not Missourians,” Foster argued.

Lack of Regulatory Clarity Fuels Opposition

MADOGA also raises concerns about the lack of a finalized regulatory framework for sports betting in Missouri, which will only be developed after the vote. The group argues that this leaves voters without a clear understanding of what legalized sports betting would entail in terms of rules, consumer protections, and the overall economic impact on the state.

“We are building a broad coalition and are prepared to wage a vigorous campaign to educate voters across the state and ensure the measure is defeated,” Foster stated. MADOGA plans to rally support by highlighting potential risks associated with the amendment and questioning the promises made by its backers.

Pro-Legalization Campaign Highlights Education Funding

On the opposing side, supporters of sports betting legalization are focusing on the potential financial benefits for Missouri’s education system. A pro-Amendment 2 advertisement recently aired, featuring a former teacher advocating for the amendment, citing increased revenue for schools as a key reason for her support. The ad, produced by the Sports Betting Alliance Missouri, a lobbying group backed by industry heavyweights such as FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, and Fanatics, aims to sway public opinion by emphasizing the positive impact on local education funding.

As the November vote approaches, the debate over Amendment 2 is heating up, with each side presenting compelling arguments. While proponents highlight the potential for increased revenue for Missouri’s schools, opponents like MADOGA warn of the dangers of deceptive practices and tax loopholes that could ultimately harm the state. With public opinion divided and high stakes on the line, the outcome of this vote could significantly influence the future of gambling in Missouri, setting a precedent for other states grappling with the expansion of legalized sports betting.