Asian Americans Pay the Price for Massachusetts Casino Profits

Ben Hires, Boston Globe, Opinion

The state has a responsibility to curb predatory casino practices.

What responsibility does the state have when its revenue depends on the exploitation of vulnerable communities? A recent investigation by The Boston Globe shed long overdue light on predatory casino practices in Massachusetts, confirming what many in Boston’s Asian American communities have long known: The casino regulatory system isn’t working as the state intended — but may be working exactly as casino owners have designed.

Asian Americans make up 8.3 percent of the state’s population, yet they account for nearly 25 percent of gamblers at Encore Boston Harbor. Even more alarming, reporting found that more than 80 percent of those sued by the casino for debt are of Asian descent. These are not just statistics, but warning signs of an industry failing to protect vulnerable communities.

At BCNC, we see the human toll behind these numbers every day. Problem gambling is not simply an individual choice; it arises from systemic pressures like economic insecurity, social isolation, language barriers, and a lack of culturally relevant support, turning what might begin as entertainment into addiction, with devastating ripple effects for families.

For many working-class Asian Americans, gambling is a multilayered and deeply rooted problem. BCNC’s 2021 Asian CARES report, commissioned by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, shed valuable light on problem gambling in the Asian community. Drawing on in-depth interviews of 40 Asian community members in Greater Boston, it found that nearly 60 percent viewed gambling as a way to earn quick money, and 65 percent cited gambling as entertainment or social activity with friends. For many, it offers a sense of belonging, a rare space for connection in otherwise isolating lives.

Casinos understand these dynamics, and they have deliberately targeted working-class Asian immigrant neighborhoods, structuring their outreach and marketing, offering free bus service exclusively to these communities. This is not responsible gaming. It is targeted exploitation.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission, funded by state gambling revenue, was established with a clear mandate: to regulate the casino industry and protect consumers. Yet key recommendations from our report, including oversight of targeted ethnic marketing and greater transparency around busing practices, have gone largely unimplemented.

At the same time, the state continues to benefit. Since the gaming industry was established in Massachusetts, casinos have brought approximately $2.4 billion in tax revenue and assessments to the state. But only a fraction of that has been reinvested into the communities bearing the greatest harm.

The GameSense program, which aims to curb compulsive gambling at Massachusetts casinos, while well-intentioned, is focused on individuals, not communities, and cannot redress the underlying drivers of addiction.

We know what works, because we are already doing it.

At BCNC’s Pao Arts Center, with the support of the Department of Public Health Office of Problem Gambling Services and a Massachusetts Gaming Commission Community Mitigation Fund grant through the City of Boston, we have invested in culturally grounded programming that fosters connection, belonging, and mental well-being. Over the past year, more than 12,000 visitors participated in 600 events. Eighty-nine percent of participants reported feeling more connected to others. For individuals vulnerable to gambling, these spaces offer something casinos cannot: real community.

But the scale of this work is nowhere near sufficient. If the state is serious about mitigating harm, it must act in two ways.

First, it must strengthen oversight and accountability. That means enforcing existing regulations and finally implementing the Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s own 2022 responsible gambling advertising recommendations, offering strategies to limit predatory marketing that disproportionately affects immigrant communities.

Second, the state must invest — at scale — to repair the harm it has allowed. Funds from the Community Mitigation Fund should be increased and directed toward Asian-serving organizations that understand the lived realities of the communities they serve. This includes sustained investment — not one-time grants — in places that build the social infrastructure necessary to prevent harm before it starts.

Boston’s Chinatown has long been treated as expendable, with a highway that displaced residents, the Combat Zone at its edge, and decades without a neighborhood library. Today, targeted gambling practices, including digital advertising and increased busing, are adding to that burden.

When a state’s revenue depends on the exploitation of vulnerable communities, it has a responsibility not only to regulate, but to rectify past harms — and ensure communities no longer have to fight alone.