Barstool Sports personalities came under fire after posting videos criticizing potential gambling tax changes in Pennsylvania, raising questions about whether their actions constituted unregistered lobbying.
Key Takeaways
- Barstool Sports personalities posted videos opposing potential gambling tax increases in Pennsylvania
- The videos raised questions about whether they constituted lobbying, which would require state registration
- DraftKings, which has a marketing partnership with Barstool, denied requesting or paying for the content
Barstool’s Tax Opposition Campaign
In a notable departure from typical advocacy campaigns, Barstool Sports personalities including Dan ‘Big Cat’ Katz, Adam ‘Rone’ Ferrone, and Max Dolente posted videos on X criticizing potential sports betting tax changes in Pennsylvania.
Katz, who resides in Chicago, stated: “Every bet feels like we’re up against the opponent, spread, and Harrisburg’s hand in our pocket. We finally get legal gambling, something that we’ve wanted forever, and now they’re trying to tax it into the ground.”
Philadelphia sports blogger Max Dolente added in his video: “Philly fans don’t ask for much, just decent refs and maybe a team that doesn’t break us every other Sunday. Now, Harrisburg wants to break something else: our wallets.”
The timing of these posts coincided with Pennsylvania lawmakers preparing to announce a budget plan that was rumored to include new taxes on gambling winnings.
Budget Outcome and Backlash
According to Stephen Caruso of Spotlight PA, despite some Democrats pushing Republicans to increase sports betting taxes to fund public transit, no such provision was included in the final budget.
The videos generated substantial criticism and raised questions about whether they constituted lobbying activities, which would require Barstool and its talent to be registered with Pennsylvania state authorities.
Lobbying Questions Emerge
Caruso noted that while Barstool is not registered to lobby in Pennsylvania, DraftKings and its affiliates are. The two companies maintain a marketing partnership centered around gambling. When questioned, DraftKings told Spotlight PA it “did not request or pay for these posts.”
Mary Fox, executive director of the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, explained to Spotlight PA that Barstool’s videos could potentially be considered a form of lobbying known as “indirect communication.” However, she noted that exceptions might apply based on the amount of money or time invested in creating and distributing the content.
State Rep. Bryan Cutler (R., Lancaster) provided further context to Spotlight PA: “Citizen advocacy is very important. But then you have individuals who are compensated to engage on particular issues, and that’s really where that distinction is. So the question would really go back to both the companies and them as individuals. Were they being paid to put out those videos?”
Future Implications
Given the negative reaction to the videos and questions about their legal status, it remains to be seen whether Barstool will attempt similar advocacy efforts if this or other gambling legislation arises in the future. The incident highlights the increasingly complex relationship between gambling operators, their marketing partners, and regulatory advocacy in states with legal sports betting.
I remember the first time I saw Kai Tak, Hong Kong’s gambling city, I thought I was in a fairy tale. All the lights blinking, the music and the monumental buildings, what 9-year-old wouldn’t think they’ve come to a magical place? It was my father who brought me, dragging me along and when inside I was hit by the smell of frying duck. As soon as I hit 21 I returned to Kai Tak, A bit nervous to see if my mind had embellished the memory, but it hadn’t. Kai Tak was still a magical place. I decided I wanted to spend as much time as I could at this place, so I did.
