Rhode Island led on sports betting. Now it needs to keep pace.

Rhode Island moved quickly to legalize sports betting after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 decision to strike down the federal ban. The state was among the first in the nation to recognize a simple reality: sports betting was already happening, and bringing it into a legal, regulated framework would create consumer protections, generate public revenue, and provide meaningful oversight. 

The decision was forward-looking and successful.

But being one of the first states to legalize sports betting is not the same thing as maintaining a competitive market.

Today, Rhode Island operates one of the most restrictive sports betting markets in the country, with just one current operator. Later this year, for the first time, the market will expand to two. While neighboring states have embraced competitive, multi-operator models, Rhode Island continues to offer consumers far fewer choices than sports bettors can find just across the border in Massachusetts or Connecticut. In Massachusetts, there are seven sports betting operators, with three in Connecticut.

Bally’s picked to launch Rhode Island’s second online sportsbook

The uncomfortable reality is that Rhode Islanders prioritize sportsbooks options not available within the state’s regulatory regime. 

Some simply cross state lines. Others turn to illegal offshore websites operating outside U.S. oversight. In either case, restricting legal options inside Rhode Island does not change consumer behavior. It changes where that activity occurs.

Sports fans have become accustomed to products that are easy to use, offer the betting options they want, and provide a seamless experience. When those platforms aren’t available in a regulated market, people don’t stop betting. They find alternatives.

The result is lost economic activity, lost revenue, and few consumers participating with the protections of a regulated system.

Now state lawmakers are considering legislation that would modernize Rhode Island’s sports betting framework by introducing additional competition into the market. This legislation would protect the state’s existing revenue baseline and only applies a revised structure to new revenue generated above current levels. In other words, the proposal is intended to grow the market — not reduce the state’s current revenue stream. 

The legislation (SB 3118 and HB 8186) preserves the state’s regulatory oversight, protects existing state revenue, and creates a pathway for future growth. The Senate version, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Frank Ciccone, is scheduled for a floor vote by the full chamber Thursday. The House version, sponsored by Rep. Matthew Dawson, an East Providence Democrat, could follow next week.

Washington D.C. initially operated under a single-operator model similar to Rhode Island’s current approach. In 2024, D.C. transitioned to a competitive marketplace with multiple regulated operators.

The results were significant.

Sports wagering tax revenue increased from approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year 2023 to $19.3 million just two years later. The district’s chief financial officer later reported that private sports wagering revenue grew by nearly 400%, driven “primarily by the expansion of private sports wagering operations.”

That growth did not happen because sports betting suddenly became more popular; it happened because consumers responded to a better-regulated marketplace with more options and high-quality products. When leading sportsbooks like FanDuel or DraftKings enter a market, they bring established platforms that people already know and trust, along with investments in technology, responsible gaming tools, customer experience, and product innovation. Those improvements drive engagement and encourage bettors to remain within the regulated market.

The same pattern is visible across the country. States with competitive sports betting markets consistently generate stronger participation and higher revenue than states with limited models. Rhode Island currently generates approximately $40 in gross gaming revenue per capita, compared to nearly $160 in Massachusetts and $90 in Connecticut.

Those figures reflect a broader reality: Consumers respond to competition.

Competition encourages innovation. It creates incentives for operators to improve products, enhance customer experiences, and invest in responsible gaming tools. It gives consumers more reasons to stay within regulated markets rather than seek alternatives elsewhere.

Just as importantly, regulated operators are required to meet rigorous standards that illegal offshore sportsbooks simply do not. Legal sportsbooks must implement responsible gaming safeguards such as deposit limits, identity verification, fraud-prevention systems, and self-exclusion tools. Illegal operators provide none of those protections and contribute nothing to Rhode Island taxpayers. 

This isn’t a debate about whether Rhode Islanders want sports betting. That question was answered years ago. The question now is whether Rhode Island’s legal market should be powered by industry leading platforms who create a positive impact for the state or should Rhode Island continue watching consumers and revenue migrate elsewhere? 

Rhode Island was ahead of the curve when it legalized sports betting eight years ago. The state now has an opportunity to build on that success by modernizing its market for the realities of 2026.

The choice is straightforward: continue operating a system that increasingly underperforms compared to regional competitors or embrace a model that gives consumers more reasons to stay within Rhode Island’s regulated market.

The states that succeed are rarely the ones that stand still.