In a rehashing of the arguments made ahead of the state’s decision to legalize sports betting, bookmakers are appealing to lawmakers to allow Bay State residents to do their casino gambling from home legally and remove the industry from black market hands.

Opponents warn of worsening gambling problems.

The Legislature’s Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure met Monday to consider a range of bills, including a provision which would change state law to allow for adults to play casino style games — slots, roulette, craps, and other table games — from their mobile devices and home computers.

Industry experts testified Monday that some Bay State residents are wagering in “i-gaming” already, even if illegally.

“Online casino gaming is already happening in Massachusetts, just not in a legal, regulated, or taxed environment,” David Prestwood, government affairs manager for DraftKings, told the committee.

A simple internet search is all that’s required, Prestwood said, in order for any resident to begin playing casino table games online, illegally, right now. Those unregulated sites, he said, provide no consumer protections and no tax money for the state. They don’t bother with age verification or responsible gambling information, he said.

James Hartman, speaking on behalf of DraftKings competitor FanDuel, said that regardless of whether or not the state moves to regulate the industry, online casino gambling is already at a point where any resident can find an app for betting on their phone and place an illegal wager “within five minutes.”

“And they’re doing that to a tune of $7 billion per year,” Hartman said.

Those unregulated companies partner with celebrities in their advertising to bring a veneer of legitimacy, Hartman said. They target children “and other vulnerable populations” with their outreach, and there is no recourse for gamblers whose financial information is compromised.

“On the other hand, the legal i-gaming market is one of the most highly regulated industries in America,” he said, providing strong consumer protections, age verification, and problem gambling tools as a matter of law.

“At the heart of the regulated i-gaming market is a commitment to responsible gaming,” Harman said.

Prestwood told lawmakers that he’d done an internet search before joining the hearing under the query “best online casinos Massachusetts” and that he was able to find “a number of unlicensed — some overseas — operators who would be happy to provide those services, though they are unregulated in Massachusetts.”

Illegal online casino gaming is a $330 billion industry nationally, according to Prestwood. With the amount of money that people in Massachusetts might gamble if the practice is legalized here, he said, the state could “conservatively” see $230 million to $275 million in new revenue annually.

States that have already legalized i-gaming — Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia — have seen a windfall in tax revenue, Prestwood said, and they’ve taken the black market out of the gambling equation.

“Massachusetts has an opportunity to lead on this issue, by enacting smart, well regulated, and reasonably taxed i-gaming legislation. The Commonwealth can both help protect its citizens and, while doing so, unlock hundreds of millions of dollars in new revenue,” he said.

Brianne Doura-Schawohl, a problem gaming expert speaking on behalf of the Campaign for Fairer Gambling, told the lawmakers that the seven states which have legalized i-gaming all heard the same revenue-based pitches before they did so, but that the headlines about addicted gamblers which came after painted a far less rosy picture than the bookmakers had presented.

I-gaming, she quoted from research, is the “fast food of gambling.” The industry is built on “individuals who have an addiction,” Doura-Schawohl said, and data out of Connecticut found 70% of its i-gaming revenue was from just 7% of residents, many of whom were addicted or problem gamblers.

“You should consider this policy with eyes wide open,” she said. “It may result in more harm than good.”

Lawmakers took no action on the proposals during Monday’s hearing.

Story by Matthew Medsger, Boston Herald