A renewed push to permit wagering on in-state college sporting events came to the fore when ACR 140, a bill to amend the state constitution that would allow sports betting on all college sports or athletic events, was announced recently.
One More Bite at the Apple
The Garden State enjoys a vigorous sports betting market, but if New Jersey residents wish to bet on an in-state college team they must do so elsewhere, as it is currently prohibited. The main attraction for New Jersey sports bettors would be the ability to bet on Rutgers football and basketball, popular programs that reside in the Big Ten Conference.
However, there are a total of eight D-1 college programs in New Jersey that routinely dot sports betting menus throughout the nation like Seton Hall, Saint Peter’s, and Princeton which would be of interest to Garden State bettors. A proposal to allow in-state college betting failed at the polls in 2021 with 57% voting against the measure which makes this a second bite at the apple for New Jersey lawmakers.
The bill is now in front of the Assembly Tourism, Gaming, and the Arts Committee and if it is to pass muster in the legislature, then it would land on the ballot for the voters to decide in November. Whether this latest version of the bill will have better results than it did three years ago will depend on how successful the campaign is to convince voters that bringing in-state college betting to the masses will generate more revenue for the state.
What Went Wrong in ’21?
Educating and persuading voters on an issue takes time and money. The last time around the platform providers were reluctant to spend their resources to effectuate the change, which left many voters wondering what the bill was all about. Change does not come easy and many who were not aware of the pros and cons were left voting against the bill, keeping the status quo in place.
Lobbyist Bill Pascrell III was asked about why the measure failed in 2021 and he stated, “I lobbied hard to get this on the ballot, but I couldn’t convince the industry to wage a campaign. I am not at all surprised that it failed. All polling showed it upside down. It failed because not many voters knew it was on the ballot, and many also didn’t understand the question. This is, unfortunately, a missed opportunity for the industry that can’t be revisited for three years.”
Pascrell also added, “They thought it would pass easily.” He said a “modest $1 million campaign to educate and boost awareness” would have enlightened the voters and turned the vote around in favor of its passage.
Gaming attorney Jeff Ifrah added: “It is always tough to send a measure to voters when the voters may not be fully informed of the full context of the measure.”
When Porzio lobbyist Barbara DeMarco was asked at the time of the defeat how the bill would fare in the future, she said, “New Jersey is a fickle state. The fact that the referendum failed – well, I would say it failed for now.”
