It has come to my attention that the House- General Laws committee we'll hear public comments on House Bill 161 and its features to expand Virginia’s gaming to include Internet Gaming(I-Gaming). Please understand that it is my distinct pleasure to provide testimony representing the members and E-subscribers of Md. Washington Minority Companies Association (MWMCA). Since 2002, MWMCA operated as a trade, design, and material commodity trade association with hundreds of members and E- subscribers located in Virginia. Our weekly Enewsletter to small, minority and women owned businesses, is their guiding light and voice to that community. Our industry-renowned website www.mwmca.org is most sought after by major corporations and small businesses alike looking to connect with one another for mutual benefits. In essence we support and endorse total economic engineering inclusion, and we believe Virginia is ready from more. Now comes our “America’s Old Dominion” unfortunate attempt to expand its entrance into i-Gaming at a time when perhaps it's needed less. With all the years it took to achieve casino style gaming in Virginia, along with the billions of dollars it took to purchase land, seek permits, architectural/engineering design, purchase expensive power and AC equipment, construct world class facilities, train basic neophytes in gaming to serve in this industry, vendors seeking state licensing, expanded expense for security of the facilities and its patrons, and the state of Virginia building new roads to access the casinos; we are now looking to add a major burden to crush the relatively new industry. Why, when there is so much downside for perhaps making it easier to allow folks to gamble. Literally with this new legislation, one would be able to place betswhile they're in the restroom relieving themselves. We believe at MWMCA that the risk is not worth affecting the entire flourishing industry. With revenues at their all-time high and the state enjoying it and your residents are working; along with the current gaming and retail sales tax are contributing to the overall revenue of the state of Virginia. Why attempt to change that now? Therefore, we respectfully request a no vote on this ill-timely recommended legislation that will destroy the thriving casino gaming industry, as we know it now.

Dear Members of the House General Laws Committee, I respectfully urge you to support HB 161 (Virginia Lottery; Internet gaming authorized, penalties). This legislation thoughtfully brings online casino gaming — including online poker — into a regulated, transparent, and accountable framework under the oversight of the Virginia Lottery Board. Here’s why I believe HB 161 deserves your support: Protect Virginians by reducing illegal gaming. Today, many Virginians already access unregulated online gambling through offshore sites that operate outside state law, offer no age verification, and do not contribute to the Commonwealth’s funds or consumer protections. Legalizing and regulating internet gaming would bring this activity into a safer, monitored environment and help curb unlicensed operators. Generate meaningful revenue without raising taxes. A regulated online gaming market is projected to generate significant new taxable revenue — industry estimates suggest hundreds of millions of dollars over the first years of operation. These funds can support state priorities rather than being captured by illegal operators. Support problem gambling prevention and treatment. HB 161 dedicates part of its tax revenue to the Problem Gambling Treatment and Support Fund, ensuring that resources are available to help Virginians who struggle with gambling addiction. Enhance consumer protections. Legal online gaming would require strong safeguards — including age verification, self-exclusion tools, and regulatory oversight — that simply don’t exist in the current unregulated market. Keep Virginia competitive. Neighboring states already offer regulated online poker and casino gaming. If Virginia fails to act, we risk losing consumers and associated economic activity to other states. For these reasons, I respectfully ask you to advance HB 161 out of committee so the full House can consider its merits. Thank you for your time and service.

Comments Document

I STRONGLY OPPOSE Patrick HOPE why do you have to always attack the vape industry. Did you get hurt by it? Does your children disobey your parental skills and do what they want? Why don't you go after the alcohol industry? DID you know that vaping nicotine doesn't create problems for the State Police or Local Police in paperwork for DWI and DUIs? Think about that. Your law is saying its ok to have prefilled pods but not nicotine in a traditional format that has less nicotine then the pre-filled pods? DID you know that the prefilled pods have the HIGHEST nicotine level on the market? DO you go after the alcohol industry and control their alcohol proof? DO you tell them you can't add fruity, desert or bakery flavors to their product? DO you tax them on the ingredients in their products like you tax the ingredients in vape e-liquid? DO you tax the beauty, food, and drug industry for their use of Propylene Glycol and Vegetable Glycerine? Let adults that are 21+ make the choice to do what THEY want with their BODY and MINDS. If you are serious about keeping this out of the "kids" hands, then make every single SMOKE SHACK, TOBACCO HUT and the gas stations owned by NON-CITIZENS use a software like "INTELLICHECK" to scan and verify REAL IDs. Underage individuals are NOT trying to purchase traditional juice (lowest nicotine); they are buying the PRE_FILLED pods which has the HIGHEST nicotine levels. Even when the undersage individuals get the products they are getting it from those who are of age and most likely IRRESPONIBLE parents are NOT PARENTING. If you are so serious about banning and SUPPORTING THE MONOPOLY OF BIG TOBACCO, then take away the following food products from the shelf: -Potatoes -Bell Peppers -Eggplants -Chili Peppers -Tea -Cauliflower -Chocolate -Toothpaste ALSO take away all the products in the health industry like patches, OTC nicotine gum and lozenges. Those products are most likely lining your pockets with donations by the lobbyists. Find a better way to keep these products out of the hands of underage individuals; 21+ adults don't want to use BIG TOBACCOs nasty ass products!!!

Hello, "No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine." should be removed from "§ 4.1-359. Persons to whom retail tobacco products may not be sold; proof of legal age; civil penalty." or just the whole bill entirely. What good does it do ban those products from vending machines that are placed in 21+ venues? Virginia is the only state in this area of the United States that has completely banned those products from vending machines, even when the machines have ID verification and facial recognition software. I believe it should be removed from the bill entirely and allow those in Virginia to have the same opportunities as those in the surrounding states have.

In HB308, "§ 4.1-359. Persons to whom retail tobacco products may not be sold; proof of legal age; civil penalty. A. No person shall sell to any person younger than 21 years of age, knowing or having reason to believe that such person is younger than 21 years of age, any retail tobacco products. No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine." "No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine" should be removed completely unless the definition of "retail tobacco products" is changed, or should be changed to exclude "aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine" or changed to only include aerosolized or vaporized when the product contains nicotine. Including vaporized or aerosolized products that do not contain nicotine, or hemp does not make sense when applied in the term "retail tobacco products" The definition makes it so that vending machine operators cannot offer products like HealthVape, Ripple+, MONQ, and VitaStik which are aromatherapy diffusers and vitamin vaporizers, which would be far better alternatives to nicotine vapes. Removing "aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine" from the definition of "Retail tobacco products" would allow people to have the opportunity to purchase healthier alternatives to nicotine vapes from vending machines, instead of purchasing nicotine vapes from convenience stores and gas stations, provided the vending machines have ID verification and facial recognition. I still believe that those products should not be sold to those who are under the age of 21, using ID verification as well as facial recognition on vending machines would make it so those who are under the age of 21 could not purchase any aerosolized or vaporized products. My hope is that the definition of "retail tobacco products" is changed to remove those products that do not contain nicotine or hemp. I understand why the state would not want to allow people to purchase nicotine or hemp products from vending machines, but why include the products that do not contain nicotine? Thank you

The Norfolk Admirals currently sell youth jerseys that display a Rivers Casino patch on the front. This effectively advertises and markets gambling to children. The Commonwealth already recognizes the importance of protecting minors by regulating alcohol advertising through the ABC and by restricting marketing practices in the cannabis industry. Gambling should be treated with the same level of care and responsibility. Allowing casinos to place their branding on youth merchandise sends the wrong message and normalizes gambling at an early age. I believe the Commonwealth should regulate the gaming industry to prohibit casino advertising on products intended for children, just as we do with other age-restricted industries. We should not allow casinos to promote gambling to our youth.

I have attached a letter of support for HB1484