Is iGaming Having a Mid-Atlantic Moment?
In many U.S. states, iGaming remains a hard sell. Here’s where the scoreboard stands in mid-2026, and where the conversation may lead
The expansion of gaming in the United States and throughout the world has gone through its paces over time, in sprints and in marathons. Each jurisdiction, no matter where it sits in the world, continues to have thoughtful conversations on:
a.) if the market should offer gaming as a form of entertainment; and
b.) in what form should gaming exist.
With advances in technology continuing to accelerate at a rapid pace, internet gaming has challenged the traditional brick-and-mortar facilities that have existed in various forms for over a century.
Four Decades of Growth
Specifically looking at the United States, the expansion of casino gaming was relatively slow until the 2018 repeal of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) by the U.S. Supreme Court, which ushered in the expansion of sports betting.
Nevada’s gaming industry dates back more than 120 years, to the opening of the Golden Gate Casino in Downtown Las Vegas. Gaming first expanded beyond Nevada with the 1978 opening of Resorts International in Atlantic City. The expansion journey would continue over four decades through the rapid spread of sports betting across the country.
Beyond New Jersey, the expansion included Midwest riverboats that had to actually leave the dock to offer slots. Over time, the boats were permitted to dock and add tables games. Eventually, the facilities were brought ashore, allowing a better experience for the guest, including the addition of non-gaming amenities besides dock-adjacent restaurants or hotels.
We’ve also seen the expansion of tribal gaming across the country, from bingo-style machines to full-fledged gaming. Tribal gaming’s path dates back to the late 1980s but its expansion continues today as tribes continue to exercise their rights as nations to allow the funding of their governments and people with the economic engine of casino gaming.
Sports Accelerated the Pace
Sports betting put everything on the fast track—faster than a NASCAR race at Talladega. With the fall of PASPA, it gave states—for decades the stewards of gaming policy—the ability to champion an additional form of gaming.
New Jersey, which led the legal case to overturn PASPA, was first out of the gate, introducing sports betting in June 2018. It ushered in a multi-year push for the 40 U.S. jurisdictions that now offer some form of legalized sports betting. The expansion was like no other in any era of United States gaming. It was a much different conversation about iGaming, unless it was part of an overall package with sports betting, as in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Even before the repeal of PASPA, if you turned on ESPN, Fox Sports or any broadcast of a college or professional sports contest, the discussion was all about who was favored to win. If you opened up a newspaper, there was the sports section, with the games of the day across several different sporting contests and their lines. Sports has always and will always be a different conversation than iGaming, which has never been a part of water-cooler conversation like sports.
“iGaming was never an easy conversation, but casino gaming initially was not either. It has and will continue to take years to get the ideal (iGaming) model for each state across the finish line”
Brendan D. Bussmann
The iGaming debate goes back to the late 2000s and early 2010s, with discussions about online poker at the federal level. Unlike today, gaming wasn’t widely viewed as an acceptable form of entertainment, and a majority of Americans did not live in decent proximity to a commercial or tribal gaming facility. Again, New Jersey was first out of the gate, legalizing iGaming in 2013, some five years before the repeal of PASPA.
However, as we’ve seen, the paths for these two forms of gaming have been vastly different. For a host of reasons, iGaming didn’t see rapid adoption in its first few years. While two other states did legalize some form of iGaming in 2013—Nevada with poker only, as well as Delaware—it took four years for another state to even consider it.
As of today, only eight states (New Jersey, Nevada, Delaware, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Michigan, Connecticut, and more recently, Maine) have taken the path toward legalization of iGaming. Throughout all these debates, responsible gaming remains a key part of the conversation.
Recent Legislative Overtures
While several states have looked at iGaming passage over the past several years—mostly in the “I” states of the Midwest, including Iowa, Indiana and Illinois, with a handful of others—the Mid-Atlantic region has been the most dynamic. Maryland, Virgina and the District of Columbia have been the most vocal, with all three having a debate in 2026. While two of those states have closed their current debate for the year, the District of Columbia is just starting its conversation.
Maryland was the first of these jurisdictions to have a serious discussion around iGaming in 2023. This was through a host of debates, several studies and some questionable push polls that talked about its potential impact on the state. Maryland already has a difficult gaming tax structure for its brick-and-mortar facilities, and iGaming legislation to date has mirrored those same problems.
Maryland requires that voters approve an expansion of gaming on the ballot, similar to what it did when voters approved sports betting in November 2020. Over the same time period, the state faced a significant budget shortfall, which helped advance the issue. However, after three years of debate, the proposal continues to stall, due in part to opposition from some local casinos as well as differing messages by proponents on the economics of iGaming.
The commonwealth of Virginia has seen a robust and rapid conversation on iGaming this year, moving faster than most people had anticipated considering the state just expanded into the gaming sector some five years ago. This was also the first opportunity that the Sports Betting Alliance, in a change of strategy, loaded up its heavy-effort political contributions, spending millions in the 2025 election cycle between the gubernatorial and legislative races.
Through various bills, one bill emerged in each House. House Bill 161 initially failed in the lower chamber on a 46-49 vote, but later in the session was reconsidered and passed 67-30. The Senate bill, SB 118, passed 19-17 after initially failing 20-19 earlier in its initial passage. Both bills made it to a conference committee to work out a compromise, but failed to see any action past that point for a host of reasons.
HB 161 and SB 118 have provisions that already set the stage for 2027, though the debate would have continued into the next legislative session regardless. However, all the politicians who felt obligated to push along legislation after taking initial political contributions in 2025 are now going to ask for another round in 2026 and beyond, setting up a proverbial cycle that could go on for years in hopes of passage instead of having a solid plan that a majority of stakeholders buy into that passes on its merits out of the gate.
The District of Columbia became the surprise dark horse in the Mid-Atlantic conversation by also joining the iGaming debate this year. After initial introduction in April, the bill had its first hearing in early May. While the debate will continue to move forward—the budget faces another deficit—the question remains if iGaming will be able to help fill that gap as full mobile sports betting did a few years ago. Will the district with its various challenges allow iGaming as the panacea for its budget?
Sweeping Legislation
States are having a related conversation on the banning of sweepstakes casinos, which are not part of “pre-regulated” markets, as they claim to be, but part of the offshore black market that continues to plague the gaming industry around the globe. Allowing these sites to skirt existing laws and regulations on the books while offering no consumer protections and circumventing tax revenue is an easier conversation than that around iGaming. The momentum behind sweepstakes bans continues to pick up speed.
iGaming was never going to be an easy conversation, but casino gaming initially was not either. It has and will continue to take years to get the ideal model for each state across the finish line. Some states may never find that model—take for instance Texas, which has debated casino gaming now for more than two decades. Its journey to a resolution on the initial step may never come, due in part to the different messaging that has occurred over the years in developing a plan forward.
However, the iGaming debate cannot be ignored by the industry. Technology continues to change the way the world works. Almost everyone can order a pizza, book a ride, access a bank account, order any good or service and consume various forms of entertainment on a hand-held device. The gaming industry cannot sit idly by and put its head in the sand, like video chain Blockbuster did decades before, thinking that streaming was never going to be an option.
It will take leaders in the industry across the existing stakeholders to build not only consensus but also a framework that allows for the existing forms of gaming to coexist with the future of the industry, the technology advances that come with it, and its continued push to offer consumer protections in a regulated market. The legislative conversations will continue until a majority can coalesce around where to best land that debate on a state-by-state basis.
Brendan D. Bussmann, managing partner of B Global, has decades of experience in gaming, sports, and hospitality. He advises public and private companies, tribal nations, sports organizations, financial institutions, associations and government entities around the globe.
