Asa Craig

Complex topic, but I disagree with MGC's Maynard's call for more industry-linked or funded research involving the controversial "RG" framework. That's why @Arnold_Ventures @AsaCraig funding of research with a higher degree of separation from industry is a better route. Maynard today: "I think that it's important for every state and our federal government to recognize how important it is to fund research around responsible gaming. The more we know, the more we can do. I always say, 'if we can't measure it, we can't manage it.' It's a relatively new field, right? 2018 was when PASPA was repealed." Another thing I would push back on: The harms have been extensively measured in countless U.S. surveys and studies over recent years. You can put evidence-based, stronger guardrails in right now. MA has a bill on the table to do just that, which I didn't hear Maynard mention. Of course, MGC has a neutral stance on policy. Let's also not succumb to the idea that the U.S. can't implement much stronger frictions based on research from countries that have had government-sanctioned online betting for much longer than the U.S. Maynard is a thoughtful regulator and is tasked with an essentially impossible balancing act between industry interests and public health. Still, we must reject calls for RG research with industry ties or framing. People with addiction, along with affected others, deserve better.