Pennsylvania regulators have voted down a proposal that would have given self-excluding gamblers an easier path to return to state casinos, citing relapse concerns.
The proposed Regulation #125-250 would have modified the state’s self-exclusion removal process for land-based casinos to bring it in line with other forms of gambling such as online gaming, fantasy sports betting and retail video gaming terminals.
Currently, self-imposed bans for players in those latter categories automatically end after a certain time period. The user can select to be excluded for one year, five years or for life. In contrast, self-excluding players at casinos must manually remove themselves from the prohibited list after their one- or five-year exclusion terms are over.
The proposal to automatically end self-exclusion bans for casino gamblers was originally approved by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) in August 2024 but received stern criticism and negative feedback during a public comment period.
At the board’s final meeting of 2024 on Dec. 18, Senior Chief Counsel Robert Wood noted that the PGCB received 39 comments expressing concerns over the proposal, “overwhelmingly” related to protection of problem gamblers and fears of relapses. The vast majority (around 85%) of those comments came from people with backgrounds in advocacy or counseling services.
Commissioner Sara Manzano-Diaz‘s motion to abandon the proposal passed unanimously.
State Rep. says change would have increased risk
Pennsylvania Rep. Russ Diamond said in a statement that automatic removal from the self-exclusion list could have caused several problems, not least by assuming that the self-excluded gambler would have wanted to have their ban ended.
“The withdrawal of this proposed regulation is a huge win for the protection of our problem gamblers and our counselors and mental health professionals who work tirelessly to ensure that problem gamblers get the help they need,” added Diamond. “I hope the gaming control board will re-engage in this rulemaking to make the self-exclusion process consistent between all forms of gambling, while protecting our problem gamblers at the same time.
“Removing someone from the self-exclusion list without their request makes it more likely that person is unprotected from further gambling addiction and financial and emotional harm.”
