In a survey published by Scioto Analysis this morning, surveyed economists presented a range of opinions on the impact of sports betting on the Ohio economy.
Of the 23 respondents, 10 agreed that legalizing sports betting would have benefits that would outweigh the economic costs of the intervention, though many of those who agreed noted the problem of gambling addiction.
Another nine were uncertain about the impact. Among that group was Bluffton University’s Jonathan Andreas, who said legalization “wouldn't be an economic benefit if it just replaces other less-addictive forms of entertainment in the state.” Four economists disagreed with the statement, saying benefits would likely be small and could be swamped by costs borne by people with addiction.
The panel was even more split on the question of whether sports betting legalization could reduce inequality in the state, with nine economists saying it could, seven uncertain, and seven in disagreement. Those in agreement said that targeted spending of revenue could reduce inequality.
Those who were uncertain said that they were unsure whether spending could be targeted correctly to make up for the harm caused by sports betting addiction. Economists who disagreed emphasized that new revenue from one source usually means reduction in revenue from another source, causing no new benefit overall.
The Ohio Economic Experts Panel is a panel of over 40 Ohio Economists from over 30 Ohio higher educational institutions conducted by Scioto Analysis. The goal of the Ohio Economic Experts Panel is to promote better policy outcomes by providing policymakers, policy influencers, and the public with the informed opinions of Ohio’s leading economists.