Op-ed | ‘The Danger and Real Cost of Online Sports Gambling in CT’ (April 2026)

At the time, I acknowledged those arguments. I also recognized the important partnership our state has with our tribal nations, whose contributions to our economy and communities are significant and worthy of respect. But I opposed the expansion of online and sports betting for a different reason: the societal cost.

Recent reports of uncontrolled gambling highlighting concerns raised by the former New Haven police chief’s criminal arrest underscores the real-world impact of online sports gambling in Connecticut. Make no mistake: the former New Haven police chief’s circumstance has not occurred in a vacuum. Yes, as a public official, he has received the most attention. He is not alone.

Law enforcement leaders are seeing firsthand how financial stress, addiction, and easy access to betting platforms can intersect with public safety challenges.

These challenges are also a national conversation. Access to online gambling in the palm of your hand via the internet combined with constant multi-platform advertising has created an environment unlike anything we have seen before.

Gambling is no longer limited to our state’s tribal nation resort casinos. It is available 24 hours a day, often in isolation, and often without the natural stopping points that once existed. This climate, which largely provides gamblers with little to no limitations, matters.

The MLB regular season is underway, and the NBA and NHL playoffs have just begun. We love our sports, but the harsh reality is that the statewide and national conversation about these signature sporting events now go far beyond the game.

You cannot watch sporting events today without the gambling lure of wagers, parlays, the over-under, and predictive and in-play betting. All are now part of the discussion, coverage and advertising. Gambling has very much become intertwined with sports throughout our country.

When the Connecticut legislature approved online and sports betting in 2021, driven by the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court decision “Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association,” the focus was largely on revenue, convenience, and modernization. Proponents highlighted the economic benefits and the opportunity to regulate an activity that already existed.

At the time, I acknowledged those arguments. I also recognized the important partnership our state has with our tribal nations, whose contributions to our economy and communities are significant and worthy of respect. But I opposed the expansion of online and sports betting for a different reason: the societal cost.

That concern had merit then and even more now. It was grounded in data and in the experiences of other states and countries. I point to Australia, a sport-loving country where athletic competition is part of the national identity. Research statistics showed that the expansion of online sports betting was followed by a sharp increase in problem gambling and addiction rates, particularly among younger individuals. And a de-emphasis on the sporting game and results itself.

Today, those concerns are no longer hypothetical in Connecticut.

Sacred Heart University released a comprehensive “National Poll on Perceptions of Sports Gambling” where 76.1% of respondents acknowledged the social acceptance of sports gambling.

Many individuals will (and do) participate responsibly. But others, particularly young adults and those who may be vulnerable to addiction, are exposed to a system designed for constant engagement and the chase for that next “hit” of dopamine borne from a winning bet.

When that engagement becomes compulsive, the consequences can be severe: financial strain, ruined relationships, and in some cases, run-ins with the law.

The purpose here is not to blame those who support online and sports betting, or reverse past decisions. As policymakers, it is our duty to look critically at the decisions that we make, assess their effect on the public, and adjust accordingly.

In 2021 during Senate debate of Connecticut Public Act 21-23, I urged my colleagues to take two additional steps for the public good: invest more meaningfully in addiction prevention and treatment, and conduct a comprehensive study of the social and economic impacts of expanded gambling.

Those recommendations are even more important today.