Ohio Governor Mike DeWine stated on Wednesday that he is against the push to legalize online gaming in the state. With his term only expiring in 2027, that means Ohio online poker is likely off the table this year and in next year’s legislative session as well.
Buckeye State legislators began trying to legalize iGaming in 2024. However, support for online poker and casino games is thin enough that just passing a bill in the legislature would be difficult. The odds of overcoming a gubernational veto are effectively nil.
While speaking to reporters at the Ohio State Fair, DeWine discussed his opposition to the legislature’s iGaming efforts. Online poker is a sufficiently niche interest at this point that it would have to be legalized alongside online casinos, if at all.
There are currently two proposals in the Ohio state legislature to legalize iGaming, one in the House and one in the Senate. Both proposals held hearings in May. However, the governor’s words bode poorly for their advancement.
I’m not for it. Basically, to put a casino in everybody’s hands, 24/7, I think is probably not a great idea. And I think it will cause more pain and suffering …as far as gaming addiction.
Gov. DeWine appears to be taking the approach of opposing the negative consequences that gambling can bring by pointing to addiction. He also added to the same reporters:
I think we probably have enough gambling in the state already.
He is referring to Ohio’s legalization of sports betting in 2023, which he endorsed at the time.
The Republican governor is now in his second term, which will expire on January 11, 2027. Vivek Ramaswamy will be one of the candidates in next November’s election, and could be more amenable to iGaming than DeWine. In principle, his libertarianesque brand of conservatism should make him pro-competition in the gambling space, and past comments indicate that he sees gambling as a personal choice.
Opposition to Protect Casinos
Gov. DeWine’s stated reason for opposing online gaming is concerns about addiction. However, much of the political resistance comes from the brick-and-mortar casino industry and its unions. Given that 98% of sports betting in Ohio has taken place online since its legalization, there is a belief that the legalization of iGaming would cannibalize traffic to retail casinos. It remains a matter of debate whether and to what extent online casinos help or hurt their physical counterparts. However, casino players do not exhibit the same overwhelming preference to play online that sports bettors do. In states where both options exist, retail casinos still make more revenue than casino apps.
Even retail gaming is fairly new for Ohio. Residents used to visit the neighboring states of Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia to get their casino fix before Ohio legalized them in 2009. Since then, retail gaming in Ohio has flourished, with 11 brick-and-mortar casino options. The state’s three major cities—Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati—all have at least one casino.
Opposition to online gambling expansion is more organized than ever. The National Association Against iGaming appeared this year, dedicated to opposing bills like Ohio’s, primarily citing fears of retail casino cannibalization. Mark Stewart, who leads that organization, has claimed that casinos create jobs, while iGaming does not have nearly the same economic impact.
He told News 5 in Cleveland:
To build two casinos, we employ over 3,000 people, and we invested a billion dollars in Pennsylvania. We’re supporting literally thousands of small businesses every day. On the iGaming side, we needed to hire one person and we invested $500,000.
Still, there are those who will continue to push for iGaming legalization in Ohio in face of the heavy opposition, which now includes the Governor. Representatives Marilyn John and Brian Stewart are the ones leading the charge. They brought forth House Bill 298, which pushed for iGaming citing a goal of increased tax revenue and job creation.
Image Credit: Jason H. Salley via Wikimedia Commons (license)






