The odds are in, and they’re not looking very pretty for impassioned efforts to expand legalized gambling in Ohio.

But that’s just fine with us, thank you, as passage and enactment of Senate Bill 197 to make Ohio the eighth state in the union with lawfully regulated online casino gaming would pose a plethora of public health risks, economic uncertainties and constitutional challenges.

To be sure, some may consider casinos at your fingertips a logical extension of Ohio’s continued growth in legalized gambling over the past several decades. Most of those initiatives — from state lotteries to casinos / racinos to online sports betting — have been met with opposition from this newspaper and many other groups. We must now broaden that opposition to SB 197’s contentious aim to permit up to 11 online casino licenses, with each license costing a staggering $50 million, the highest in the nation.

Those licenses would open the floodgates to the availability of slots, interactive table games, parimutuel horse wagering and online Ohio Lottery ticket sales at the fingertips of millions of Ohioans. Republican Sen. Nathan Manning’s bill that projects such gaming to begin next March would represent the largest increase in legalized gambling in Ohio history. A similar bill is brewing in the state House.

Supporters of the concept argue that regulated online gaming could generate a jackpot of tens of millions of dollars annually to increasingly strained state coffers. But we must add our voice to the overwhelming ranks of opponents who wisely point out those relatively minimal fiscal benefits pale in comparison to the multitude of social and economic costs of iGaming.

Of the 40 individuals and groups providing testimony on Manning’s bill late last month in Columbus, only two — online gaming representatives — reportedly expressed wholesale support for the legislation.

Many of the opponents targeted the potentially destructive human toll. Among them was David Mahan, policy director for the Center for Christian Virtue. His group has drafted an online letter signed by more than 120 faith leaders throughout Ohio opposing expansion of gambling to the internet.

In it, the CCV states, “From our pulpits and in our counseling rooms, we have seen the real costs of gambling addiction: broken marriages, lost homes, mental health crises and children left behind. It is morally indefensible for the state to rely on the losses of its own people, particularly the poor and the young, to fund government operations.”

Another opponent, Mark Stewart, president of the National Association Against iGaming, presented compelling evidence from the World Health Organization: “Online gambling can be 10 times more harmful than other forms of gambling.”

Others cited a 2022 Ohio Gambling Survey that estimates more than 250,000 problem gamblers reside in the state and that 1 in 5 of them have attempted suicide or have indicated a willingness to do so.

And as Tony Coder, executive director of the Ohio Suicide Prevention Foundation, testified, unlike the state’s network of brick-and-mortar casinos and racinos with protections and programs in place to assist problem gamblers, no such safeguards would be available to those gambling in total isolation.

Gov. Mike DeWine also shares those fears. “Anybody who’s got an iPhone could basically have a casino in there. And the potential for addiction is just massive,” he said in a statement opposing iGaming.

Other opponents rightly focus on its potential adverse impact on established casinos and racinos, such as Hollywood Gaming at Mahoning Valley Race Course in Austintown. Representatives of Ohio-based Jack Entertainment and Churchill Downs testified that online gaming poaches play from such establishments, which, in turn, can result in significant job losses.

Such cannibalization already has had devastating consequences for our neighbor to the east. According to the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, nearly 3,700 state casino workers have lost their jobs since iGaming became legal there in 2019. That represents a 26% decline in all casino jobs.

In addition to the human and economic costs of internet gambling, sticky and complex constitutional issues also muddy the waters. An analysis of SB 197 by the Legislative Services Commission found the Ohio Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether online gambling is even permitted in the state’s constitution.

So given the many troubling concerns and legitimate questions swirling around iGaming, it’s no wonder that online gambling is listlessly limping in its quest to saturate our nation. In fact, not one single state has approved its introduction over the past two years. But that’s not for a lack of trying.

In that period, state legislatures have considered it 21 times, and it has been rejected each and every one of those times. Clearly, Ohio lawmakers must follow that lead and keep resistance to iGaming on a roll.