The vice president of the Virginia Moose Association (VMA) is raising concerns about proposals to expand online casino-style gambling, arguing that claims of economic benefits overlook differences between nonprofit gaming and commercial gambling operations.
“We work through the Virginia Department of Charitable Gaming, and we’re heavily regulated in what we can do with our gaming,” said Don Ridenhour, VMA vice president and an officer with Moose Lodge 2573 in Salem, told Old Dominion News. “Our biggest concern is that online gaming is very unregulated, whereas ours is very regulated.”
“With charitable gaming, we have to give away a certain percentage of the money we take in to 501(c)(3) charities,” Ridenhour said. “Our job is to give back to the community.”
The General Assembly currently is considering proposals that would authorize internet casino gaming, often referred to as iGaming, and place it under the authority of the Virginia Lottery Board.
Senate Bill 118 would create a regulated online casino market in Virginia and authorize internet gaming and establish oversight through the Lottery Board, according to the Virginia Legislative Information System bill summary.
A fiscal analysis of SB 118 says the proposal would allow licensed casino operators to run online gaming platforms and would impose a 20% tax on adjusted gross internet gaming revenue.
In the House, House Bill 161 outlines a similar regulatory structure and a 15% tax rate, as described in the House fiscal impact statement.
Ridenhour said charitable gaming organizations operate under rules requiring proceeds to support nonprofit causes, a structure he said differs from commercial gaming models.
Charitable gaming in Virginia is overseen by the Virginia Department of Charitable Gaming, which regulates nonprofit raffles, bingo, and similar activities conducted by qualified organizations. Groups such as Moose lodges use gaming revenue to fund local charitable initiatives and community programs.
Ridenhour said his local lodge distributes thousands of dollars annually to community organizations, including schools and first responders.
As Virginia lawmakers debate authorizing online casino gaming, they are assessing whether “iGaming” would generate new economic activity or shift spending from existing brick-and-mortar casinos. A group backing “sweepstakes-style” online gambling said this week that legalizing such online activity could have “massive potential” for the state.
But opponents “believe that iGaming will cannibalize any retail casino business” in the state, which would have a net negative impact on gambling revenue, reported Saturday Down South.
Virginia authorized casinos in Bristol, Danville, Portsmouth and Petersburg in recent years, promoting them as economic development anchors expected to generate local jobs, tourism and tax revenue. Critics of online casino expansion argue that allowing gambling via smartphones could reduce in-person visitation at those facilities.
“Cannibalization” of existing Virginia casinos “remains the bill’s biggest roadblock,” reported iGamingToday, reporting that opponents of the legislation say, “legalizing iGaming could strip the state of hundreds of millions in annual revenue and wipe out thousands of jobs tied to physical casinos.”
iGaming “is a job killer, not a job creator,” wrote Tad Berman, founder of Virginians for Integrity in Horse Racing and Casino Gambling, in a December op-ed in Cardinal News.
“If we take the middle ground and see a 20% decrease in visitors to the Bristol casino, it would mean a corresponding 20% decrease in the number of employees needed to service their customers,” Berman wrote. “That would mean fewer slot attendants, cleaning persons, security personnel, dealers, table game supervisors, hotel staff, housekeepers, valets, restaurant waitstaff, bartenders and so on and so forth would be needed.”
Ridenhour said he remains skeptical of projected economic gains without clear community reinvestment requirements.
“I don’t know what benefits they’re talking about unless there’s a major tax on them,” he said. “The money we give back is money the state doesn’t have to spend on social programs.”
“At my Moose lodge, we give $5,000 to one of the poorest schools in our area to support its student food bank,” he said. “We also give to fire departments, police departments, and veterans groups. We spread that money throughout our community.”
He also raised concerns about accessibility tied to mobile gambling platforms.
“Our members are all 21 and over and participate voluntarily, but we worry about online gaming where kids could possibly get into it,” Ridenhour said. “How easy is it for a kid to pick up your cell phone and start playing?”
The Senate has advanced SB 118 to the House after a floor vote, while HB 161 has moved through House committee review and awaits additional consideration before reaching the full chamber. With crossover deadlines approaching, lawmakers could take additional floor votes as early as next week to determine whether online casino legislation continues advancing this session.
