Finance
It's time to rein in sports betting
When it comes to your finances, sports betting may be one gamble you don’t want to take.
Wagering on sports can lead to poorer debt management and worse credit scores. Bettors are also more likely to increase their spending and shrink their investments, according to a pair of recent studies. The consequences are biggest among financially vulnerable populations.
What’s worse, per a third study, is that the way sports betting is evolving could make it one of the most addictive forms of gambling.
It’s time for policymakers to step in and regulate this budding betting industry six years after it was legalized in the US to help people avoid their worst impulses — before it’s too late.
“As individuals, voters, [and] policymakers, I think our results are concerning,” Justin Balthrop, a co-author of one of the studies and an assistant professor of finance at the University of Kansas, told Yahoo Finance.
“But it’s very hard to make prescriptions before you have a diagnosis. And what I think our paper is really trying to do is get very precise estimates of exactly what the problems are.”
The financial consequences of sports betting
Sports betting began to take hold after the Supreme Court struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act in May 2018, allowing states to set their own sports gambling laws.
So far, sports betting is legal through retail and/or online sportsbooks in 38 states and the District of Columbia. Revenue has jumped, growing 30.3% to $7.56 billion year to date through July from the same period last year.
In his study, Balthrop — who refers to himself as “a pretty avid and voluminous sports bettor” — took advantage of the staggered rollout of sports betting across the US after its legalization, giving him and his colleagues time to understand the before and after effects of this betting.
What he found was for every $1 deposited into online sportsbooks, those households reduce their investment allocations by $2. The doubling effect — from $1 to $2 — comes from the additional spending outside of the bets to support their gambling. Think extra streaming services or more sports bar tabs to watch games.
Additionally, sports betting increases the number of times households overdraw their bank accounts, Balthrop found. These effects were worse for financially constrained households, which also reduced their credit card payments while increasing their balances.
“The core of this effect is taking place in households that may not have budgetary slack,” Balthrop said.
Davide Proserpio and his colleagues found similarly concerning findings in their study. Overall, the average credit score in a state fell by 0.3% after legalizing sports gambling. That figure triples to 1% if the state permitted online sports gambling.
The fact the study took the average credit score of a state’s entire population likely dilutes the real impact on a bettor’s personal credit score, Proserpio, an associate professor of marketing at the University of Southern California, said.
On top of that, bankruptcies, debt consolidation loans, and debt collections increased in states that legalized sports betting, especially online betting — to the point that Proserpio found that lenders restricted access to credit to protect themselves. Low-income young men were more likely to be affected.
“It’s not just gambling is affecting, on average, consumer financial health,” he said, “it is also affecting a part of the population that is already low income and probably has other types of [financial] problems.”
‘A casino in our pockets’
Balthrop and Proserpio documented the consequences of sports betting, but their studies didn’t examine why this particular form of gambling can be so detrimental.
That’s where Dr. Jamie Torrance, a researcher in psychology at Swansea University in the UK, and his colleagues come in. They examined numerous studies worldwide on gambling in what’s called a scoping review and unearthed patterns to help explain why sports betting has gotten so pernicious. It comes down to three factors: access, quantity of bets, and illusion of control.
Historically, sports betting was a slow, “simplistic form of gambling,” Torrance said. To wager on a game, you had to call up a booker or walk into a betting shop. You could only bet if a team was going to win, lose, or tie. And then you had to wait until the game was over for the outcome of your bet.
“There’s lots of research that indicates that the longer you have to wait for a gambling outcome, the less addictive and harmful the product usually is,” Torrance said.
Not anymore with sports gambling, which is instantly accessible on our phones and more akin to slot machines.
“We’re basically walking around with a casino in our pockets,” Torrance said.
On popular apps such as DraftKings and FanDuel, bettors can wager at any time of the day, on any sport, on any game. They can bet on more than just who wins the game, too; they can put money on the outcome of the next baseball pitch or field goal kick. The options are nearly endless and the results come back faster.
“That is a big issue,” he said.
Another major problem is that sports bettors can easily convince themselves they can beat the odds, Torrance said, providing “an illusion of control.”
They fancy themselves as sports experts. They watch all the games and read all the game reports. They may subscribe to sports newsletters with insider info. Heck, maybe they were a half-rate player a decade ago.
“Sports betting has a way of tapping into people’s misestimation of their own expertise,” Balthrop said, agreeing with Torrance.
But — like any other type of gambling — the game is rigged. The house always wins.
‘A trade-off’
Torrance’s research also uncovered how sports betting could evolve — and his two major predictions are unsettling.
First, he expects sports betting companies to employ augmented reality. For instance, you could point your phone at a live sporting event, and the app would provide real-time odds on different bets.
Second, he anticipates these companies will provide bettors with very specific notifications based on their gambling behavior. A person could receive an alert that the star player’s mother is having surgery this week that could affect the player’s performance. Maybe the recommendation is to bet against the team.
“That kind of stuff encourages what we discussed earlier, which is the illusion of control,” he said.
This is why all three researchers embarked on these studies, to provide crucial data on gambling to inform lawmakers who — to be honest — may be swayed more by the tax revenue sports betting provides. But citizens who get themselves into too much debt or don’t save for retirement become a “social cost burden” down the road, Balthrop said.
“There is a trade-off here,” Proserpio agreed.
Australia offers a blueprint, recently implementing ways to slow the betting process to combat those ruinous consequences. But time is ticking in the US as the sports betting industry evolves and grows.
Lawmakers in Missouri and Oklahoma have introduced bills to legalize the industry, while two Democratic congressmen this month introduced a bill that would allow the federal government to regulate advertising, bet-making, and artificial intelligence in the industry.
“I’d like to think that you guys over the pond have more time to reduce harm, but in reality, I don’t think that’s going to be the case,” Torrance said. “I think, in fact, it’s going to mirror the UK where we have lots of gambling harm.”
In other words, don’t bet on it.
Janna Herron is a Senior Columnist at Yahoo Finance. Follow her on X @JannaHerron.
Click here for the latest personal finance news to help you with investing, paying off debt, buying a home, retirement, and more
Read the latest financial and business news from Yahoo Finance
Before seeking a new referendum MPS needs to rebuild trust in the community through completing state audits, putting in place controls to prevent overspending and routine reports to the public.
For MPS Superintendent Brenda Cassellius, who just wrapped up her first year leading Milwaukee’s public school system, her tenure has been punctuated by some very big numbers.
The first is $252 million. That is the amount of new spending voters narrowly approved in an April 2024 referendum to support operations in Wisconsin’s largest school district. Just months later, MPS was rocked by revelations the district was months behind in filing key financial reports to the state, which led to former Superintendent Keith Posley’s resignation.
The second is $1 billion. MPS faces a deferred maintenance backlog exceeding $1 billion. The district’s enrollment has declined 30% over the last 30 years, leaving many schools at less than 50% full. That, in part, is driving a plan to close some schools and to improve others to help lower costs.
The final is $46 million, the deficit MPS was running for the 2024-25 school year, an unexpected shortfall which has led to hundreds of staff layoffs.
Getting the district’s accounting, budgeting and financial reporting back on track has dominated Cassellius’s first year at MPS. In an April 15 interview with the Journal Sentinel’s editorial board, she talked in detail about the challenges putting that into order and progress she sees in restoring transparency into its operations.
State funding and aging buildings create budget nightmares
Cassellius says state needs to keep up its share of school funding
In an interview with the Journal Sentinel editorial board, MPS leader Brenda Cassellius says budgets and buildings are her two top worries.
Cassellius said the on-going budget crisis is her top concern. She said the state’s failure to live up to its share of funding is exacerbating MPS’ budget woes. A group of school districts, teachers and parents filed suit against the state Legislature and its Joint Finance Committee claiming the current state funding system is unconstitutional and prevents schools from meeting students’ educational needs.
Funding for special education is especially critical. About 20% of MPS students have disabilities, almost twice the share of the city’s charter schools, and the average of 14% across Wisconsin.
“What’s keeping me up now, you know, is really just the budget crisis we’re in, with not only this year but multiple years going out without additional state aid, we’ve been not getting funding for what our needs are for our students, and particularly our students with special needs,” she said.
Although the state budget increased special education funding to a 42% reimbursement rate, the actual rate has been about 35%. Another component to the budget headache is the age of MPS buildings. The average age is 85 years-old compared to 45 across the nation.
“We have just kicked this can down the curb or kicked it down the street or whatever you call it for too long. And it’s time that we really take on a serious conversation about the conditions of the learning environments in which we send our children,” she said. “Particularly in Milwaukee Public Schools, we serve the most vulnerable children. Children who have language barriers, children who have disabilities, children in high-concentrated poverty.”
What needs to happen before MPS seeks another referendum
Voters need to be comfortable MPS has made tough budget decisions
In an interview with Journal Sentinel editorial board, Brenda Cassellius said voters will need to see budget improvements before seeking more spending
Cassellius said MPS will definitely need to go back to voters for a new referendum in the future. In addition to the 2024 measure, voters approved an $87 million plan in 2020.
Before doing that, she said the district first needs to rebuild trust in the community through completing required state audits, putting into place controls to prevent overspending and routine reports to the school board and public about finances.
“I don’t think that the voters are going to want us to bring something forward until they feel comfortable that we have done the cleanup that is necessary,” she said. “And we’ve built the trust that we have the sufficient controls in place.”
In the interim, she’s hoping the state will meet its constitutional responsibility to adequately fund public schools.
“What the public expects is you know where the money is, you’re spending it as close as you can to children, you’re getting good on the promise around art, music, and PE, and the things the public said they wanted to fund,” Cassellius said. “And they want their kids to have so that they have a quality education and an excellent education in Milwaukee Public Schools, and that they had the right amount of staff that they actually need. In the school to be safe and to run a good operation.”
Rebuilding finance staff in wake of $46 million in overspending
MPS is rebuilding school finance staff in wake of reporting lapses
In an interview with the Journal Sentinel editorial board April 15, MPS superintendent discusses accountability for district’s financial problems.
The $46 million budget shortfall from the 2024-25 school year started coming into view last fall and was confirmed in mid-January. Cassellius noted that in addition to hiring a new superintendent, MPS also parted ways with its comptroller and CFO.
“We are really rebuilding the personnel and staff of the finance department. That is what’s critical, is having the right people in the right seats doing the work,” she said. “Also critical is making sure that you have the right controls in place. The audit findings found that we did not have proper controls in place and now we have those proper controls in place and when we find things we put new SOPs in place and that is what any business does.”
Identifying that shortfall, though painful, was the result of better accounting.
“Being three years behind in auditing means that you don’t have full sight on your actual revenues and expenditures. And so we have now full sight of our revenues and our expenditures and that’s why we were able to see this new deficit of $46 million,” she said. “And we still continue to work with DPI on those processes to make sure that every month we’re doing monthly to actuals and doing those accounting, reporting that to the board. In a way that is consumable to the public that they can understand.”
Jim Fitzhenry is the Ideas Lab Editor/Director of Community Engagement for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Reach him at jfitzhen@gannett.com or 920-993-7154.
Property markets move in cycles, and with interest rates rising and other pressures like high fuel costs, some markets are clearly slowing down. Many first-home buyers who have only ever seen markets going up are conditioned to think that when purchasing, competition is always intense and decisions need to be made quickly.
In those times, buyers often feel they need to act fast, stretch their budget and secure a property at almost any cost. But things have definitely changed.
In a softer market, the dynamic shifts. Properties take longer to sell, competition thins, and it’s the vendors who begin to feel pressure.
RELATED
For buyers who understand how to navigate that change, the balance of power quickly moves in their favour. The opportunity is not simply to buy at a lower price. It is to negotiate from a position of strength.
If that’s you right now, these are the key skills first-home buyers need to take advantage of in softer market conditions.
The most important shift in a soft market is psychological. In a rising market, buyers often feel like they are competing for limited opportunities. In a softer market, the opposite is true. There are more properties available, fewer active buyers and less urgency overall. This gives buyers options.
When buyers understand that they are not competing with multiple parties on every property, their decision-making improves. They are more willing to walk away, compare opportunities and avoid overpaying. Negotiation strength comes from not needing to transact immediately. When that pressure is removed, buyers are able to engage more strategically.
One of the most common mistakes first-home buyers make is continuing to apply strategies that only work in rising markets. Auction urgency is a clear example. In strong markets, auctions often attract multiple bidders and create competitive tension. In softer conditions, properties are more likely to pass in, shifting the process away from a public bidding environment into a private negotiation.
This is where leverage increases.
Private negotiations allow buyers to introduce conditions that protect their position. These may include finance clauses, longer settlement periods or price adjustments based on due diligence. Opportunities that are rarely available in competitive markets become standard in softer ones.
The Board of Visitors Finance Committee met Thursday and approved a 3.6 percent average increase in tuition, a 4.8 percent average increase in meal plan costs and a 5 percent increase in the cost of double-room housing for the 2026-27 school year. The approval was unanimous amongst Board members, though some expressed resistance to the increases before voting in favor of them.
The Committee heard from Jennifer Wagner Davis, executive vice president and chief operating officer, and Donna Price Henry, chancellor of the College at Wise, about reasons for the raise in tuition and rates. According to Davis and Henry, salary increases for professors and legislation passed by the General Assembly contribute to tuition and rates increases.
The Finance Committee, chaired by Vice Rector Victoria Harker, is responsible for the University’s financial affairs and business operations, and the Committee manages the budget, tuition and student fees.
Changes in tuition vary between schools, with the School of Law seeing at most a 5.1 percent increase, the School of Engineering & Applied Science seeing at most a 3.2 percent increase and the College of Arts and Sciences seeing at most a 3.1 percent increase in tuition for the 2026-27 school year.
For the 2026-27 school year at the College at Wise, the Committee also unanimously approved a 2.5 percent average increase in tuition, a 3.8 percent increase in meal plans and a 2 percent increase in the cost of housing.
Last year, the Committee approved a 3 percent average increase in tuition, a 5.5 percent increase in meal plans and a 5.5 percent increase in the cost of housing for the University.
Davis cited increased costs as the primary reason for the approved increase in tuition. She said that the budget that could be passed by the General Assembly for June 30, 2027 through June 30, 2028 could increase professor salaries — University professors receive raises via this process. Davis said that the Senate and House of Delegates have separate proposals dealing with the pay increases that are currently unresolved, with House Bill 30 raising salaries by 2 percent and Senate Bill 30 raising salaries by 3 percent.
Davis said every percent increase in faculty salaries costs the University $15 million annually, and the Commonwealth will increase funding to the University by $1-2 million to help pay for that increase. According to Davis, the most common way to stabilize the budgetary imbalance caused by raised salaries is through tuition raises.
Beyond the increase in salary, Davis cited the minimum wage increase, inflation and Virginia Military Survivors & Dependents Education Program as increased costs to the University. VMSDEP is a program that gives education benefits to spouses and children of disabled veterans or military service members killed, missing in action or taken prisoner. Davis said that the program is “partially unfunded” and could cost the University somewhere between $3.6 to $6 million, depending on how many students qualify for the program.
Davis spoke on other contributing factors to the increase in tuition, specifically collective bargaining — which allows workers to bargain for better wages and working conditions.
“If we look at other institutions or other states that have collective bargaining, [collective bargaining] does put an upward pressure on tuition,” Davis said.
Prior to Thursday’s meeting, the Committee heard the proposal for tuition increases from Davis and Henry April 6 in a Finance Committee tuition workshop with public comment. During the tuition workshop, tuition increases ranged from 3 to 4.5 percent for the University and 2 to 3 percent for the College at Wise. Both increases approved Thursday are within the ranges originally proposed.
Meal plan costs, on average, will be increasing by 4.8 percent in the upcoming academic year. Davis said that the University has been expanding dining options with the opening of the Gaston House and new locations for the Ivy Corridor student housing that is still in progress. She also said that the University has been taking steps to increase the availability of allergen-friendly food options.
Davis shared that the 5 percent cost increase in housing is due to the expansion of student housing in the Ivy Corridor. Davis also said that there will be 3,000 new units added to the Charlottesville housing market by 2027, of which 780 beds will be for University housing. Davis said that she hopes the Ivy Corridor housing would “free up” the city housing supply by having more students live on Grounds.
Board member Amanda Pillion said she was “concerned” about how tuition increases would harm rural families — she said the constant increases in cost could make a University education out of reach for middle-income Virginians.
“This is the second governor I’ve served under. Both times I’ve heard affordability, affordability, affordability,” Pillion said. “We need to really be conscious of the fact that … there is a large group of people that [are middle-income] that these increases [in tuition and fees] are really tough for.”
The Committee also approved a renovation for The Park — an 18-acre recreational hub in North Grounds — which will cost $10 million. As part of the renovation, The Park will include a maintenance facility, storm water systems and a maintenance access route. Davis said the renovation will address safety and security issues for the 200 people that use The Park daily. According to Davis, the University will use $2 million of institutional funds and issue $8 million of debt to fund the renovation.
The Finance Committee will reconvene during the regularly scheduled June Board meetings.
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoGame 21: Tigers at Red Sox, Garrett Crochet battles both Detroit and the weather
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoWhy do gray whales keep dying in San Francisco’s waters?
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoDallas Mavericks Owners Might Be Making Big Mistake in Search for New GM
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoDefense dominates, Mensah flashes in Miami’s spring game – The Miami Hurricane
-
Boston, MA2 hours ago
A crowd scientist is helping the Boston Marathon manage a growing field of 30,000-plus runners
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoDenver Nuggets Altitude broadcasts now being offered in Spanish for first time ever
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoNeed to shred? Free drive-up/ride-up shredding Wednesday at Village Green West Seattle
-
San Diego, CA2 hours agoGame 21: San Diego Padres at Los Angeles Angels
