Thanks for tuning in.

We visit with the legislative sponsor of Michigan's Internet Casino and Sports Gaming.

He's former state representativ Brandt Iden, now a VP in charge of government affair for a big time betting platform.

Our lead story banning cell phones in schools.

Will it fly?

Around the OTR table Simon Schuster, Cheyna Roth and Colin Jackson sit in with us as we get the inside out.

Off the record.

Production of Off the Record is made possible in par by bellwether public relations, a full servic strategic communications agency partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and issue advocacy.

Learn more at bellwether PR dot com.

And now this edition of off the Record with Tim Skubick.

Thank you very much.

Welcome back to off the recor an interesting week this week.

Lots of stuff going on and look at we turn around and we've got another person running for the U.S. Senate.

This person is whom?

We now hav Haley Stevens, who is currently a congresswoman, and she joins Who do we got now?

We got just like a massive names.

We got Abdul El-Sayed, we've got Mallory McMorrow, who's a current state senator.

I feel like is that it.

That's it for now.

And the Dems who will be on the Republican side we have Mike Rogers is running.

Uh, there's a few other people that are stepping, putting the name out there.

You know, I think Rya Kelley might be someone who coul potentially be entering the race.

Tudor Dixon, Someone who could be potentially entering the race.

What does Stevens bring to the table?

I think she brings a decent amount of energy a decent amount of experience.

I think she when you look at the current batch of Democrats, you've got Mallory McMorrow, who tends to be sort o like the middle ground person.

And then you've got Abdul El-Sayed, who is the more progressive left.

He's a Bernie Sanders acolyte.

And then I think Haley Stevens is for the more like right of center folks.

You know, she tends to be a bi more on the conservative end of the Democratic policy.

She's a big I believe she's a big auto person.

Worked with Obama to save the auto industry, if you believe her commercial.

Exactly.

So I think that's that's sort of like where in the lineup is righ now, which if it stays this way, you know, you got you go you got your choice of like, you know, rare medium and well done.

Yeah.

I think that there's still a significant amoun of reverence for the campaigns that Elissa Slotkin was able to run.

And when you look at the way she structured her campaigns, her playbook and strateg is someone who is very focused on sort of a down the middle approach, talking about economic and kitchen table issues.

And Haley Stevens of the candidates that we've seen so far is probably best suited to sort of occupy that lane.

But of course, right now we're still in a period where Democrats are trying to reshape their identity, try to maybe figure out a new playbook moving forward in the second Trump administration.

And so whether or not they're going to sort of cling to what works, what they've seen work at least very closely in the last election or they want to try something new is going to be up to primary voters.

Yeah, and I think there's similar Haley Stevens was one of the candidates who or one of the congresspeople who was campaigning very heavily for Kamala Harris last year.

She was in a lot of these rooms when a lot of other Democrats were pushing the vice president to be mor to the left on certain issues.

Haley Stevens was right there to defend her and listen, but also, again, push Democrats to continue supporting the party and the strategy that they've been doing.

So I think to Cheyna's point, you know, you have your rare you have your medium and you have your well down options, the political spectru here, I think that's the thing.

I like it.

Yeah.

You look at she's a fighter.

She took on the Levin family.

Yeah.

And won.

Think about it and won the race.

Okay.

You know, they they gave Mr. Levin a way out to run on another district.

He decided to take her on, and he took him to the cleaners, which is something.

Are there more?

Or is this number is the number three?

Well, I think we're all kind of waiting to see if Dana Nessel joins.

Is she made any noises at all about this other than us putting it in print that she's thinking about it?

She she she actually said that to anybody?

I haven't seen it.

I haven't talked to her directly about it at all.

And this may be out of whole cloth if she's not certainly someone who's, you know, intentionally put her name out there, someone who's trying to sort of stir the pot so that her name continues to be in the mix.

You know, it's not bee a self-perpetuating speculation.

I'm not sure if she's writing a book, I'll put it that way.

Is that a prerequisite now to run for office?

You got to write a book, maybe.

I think it certainly helps because then you can get out and you can get out.

You can get on the podcast, you can get on the radio, you can get on the different shows, You can get out there and say, Well, it's my book tour.

I'm just promoting this book.

It doesn't have anything to do with my political whatevers.

I'm just trying to spread the message of all these things that I have learned.

And you can go under the guise of author.

Yeah So I think it's a good strategy.

It's good both for the campaign finance reasons, but also because our politics right now is so nationalized.

When you read these books, these are books that are not written just for Michiganders or Democratic primary voters in the state of Michigan.

These are books that are written for a national audience.

And the reason why is because Democrats increasingly are dependen on national fundraising sources.

They want to bring i major donors from out of state like the big fish who are going to give them $10,000 checks at fundraisers, but also the folks who are going to give one or $2 dozens of times throughout the campaign cycle in books, help get their name in the mix, get them on those media appearances, as Cheyna was saying, and help bring in those dollars.

Well, speaking of books, let's talk about cell phones and getting kids in classrooms to look at books.

Check it out.

It's a pretty good bet that if lawmakers impose a total ban on cell phone usage for kindergarten kids, well, ther probably will be no hue and cry.

The higher you go u the education ladder, the hewing and the crying from some parents and students will be audible.

Plus, there's a legislative dispute on how to do all of this if they're going to restrict cell phone usage.

For example, in the Senat Education Committee this week, during testimony, the chairwoman said she favors restrictions but wants schools to make most of the final decisions on what those are.

But over in the House, the sponsor wants 800 school districts to abide by some mandated baseline requirements from the state, with the flexibility to go beyond that locally.

And Representative Mark Tisdel warns, If we wait for all 886 to come up with a program, we're going to be waiting a long time.

We're just trying to establish a baseline for these school districts to operate off of.

One proposal would ban cell phones during classroom time, where teachers are more than eager to end their competition with social media devices in their students hands.

Another proposal would allow schools to ban them during lunch, during recess, and during the walks between classes.

One plan would also relax the restrictions during an emergency and for medical reasons, or if the cells are actuall part of a student's education.

Governor Whitmer, for her part, wants a bipartisan solution.

But with the Senate headed in one direction in the House and another, for Michigan to join nine other states with restrictions on cells.

Well, they'd have to find a compromise.

And they're not there yet.

So the question is, will they get there?

I think it's ver possible for them to get there.

But I mean, pedagogy is something that moves not at the pace of a legislative session but over years and generations.

And so the question of local control, I think, is a pertinent one.

And, you know, it's easie to change an individual school districts approach for administrators of change than it is for legislators to change statute generally, especially in terms of political will.

I think this is on of the one of those things where if we just let school take control on this, they will, even without any sort of law or bills or anything like that, they probably would have figured this out on their own at some.

Some already had, and exactly.

A lot of them already have.

And I think that it's it's very tricky because you are trying to figure out you have parents who want who on some in some case want their kids to have school.

I mean, we live in a time where school shootings are very real and kids want to be able to have those phones.

Their parents want them to be able to get a hold of them.

If an emergency does, God forbid, happen.

So it's a very delicate line.

Mr. Tisdel says that's exactly the wrong thing to do, because you don't want your kids on the phone not listening to the person in the front of the room to try to get them through this thing.

And he said You don't want all the parents showing up at this site if they're shooting going on.

And he said, So basically, he hears that argument, but he's rejecting it.

Yeah.

And I get what he's saying.

But also like I mean, that hasn't happened necessarily.

Like I mean, we don't know.

We don't know, but then then we're just trying to legislate all of these different hypotheticals.

I think something, too, is just in terms of getting something to the finish line, I think you have one of those valuable things, which is a common goal between both sides, and that's stopping cell phones in schools.

Now, I think to Cheyna's point, I think that schools themselves will probably come up with their own policies at some point or another.

I remember when I was in high school, maybe Simon can relate to this, to maybe Cheyna can, but when I was in high school, if you had your phone out in class, you got a detention.

Sometimes you had the cool teacher that will let you use your phone as a calculator or something or but even within that polic you still saw kids to the side looking at their phone during class and in college it's the same way.

And so even if you do have these new laws that require schools to institute these policies, who's to say it won't make that much of a difference?

We may just be going back i time to 2010, 2013, 2011, 2013.

But let me just argue on the other side.

You might have some local school boards name a location which is very sensitive to getting reelected.

The parents are breathing down your back and the kids are angry at you, you know.

Well, well, maybe we'll just just well, we're not sure we'll do anything.

Let's talk about let's form a study committee.

Yeah.

I mean, it's certainly that's the classic punt that any public body would ever use on an issue they don't want to tackle.

Right.

But I mean, I think that this is something that regardless of whether or not it's a mandate, that that schools have to restrict cell phones.

Students have been in an arms race with teachers and administrators for year on getting access to technology when they're trying to be barred from in the classroom.

And that's not going to stop regardless of whichever way this is legislated.

You know, you're always going to be doing one of thes and trying to use their phones when they shouldn't be doing the iPad kid generation.

This is natural for them.

And they're attached to these phones, aren't they?

Yeah, well, but I mean, I was attached to my Phone by now, so you've gotten only got more integral and more works and nicely put.

Look, I didn't tell you about this earlier, but Donald Trump's coming i next week to celebrate 100 days.

Does he bring money with them for Selfridge Air Force Base?

I'm sure that's something that both Governor Whitmer and House Speaker Mat Hall would appreciate very much.

Does he do it?

I think that it's very likely, and I think that it represents.

It is very likely?

I think it's fairly likely.

I mean, and I think in part because Donald Trump needs a win right now amid all the negative news around this economy, the tariff thing with him, he makes a twofer.

Yeah.

And you know, it's funny that he has something of a somewhat a semi ally here in Shawn Fain because this is something that you know speaks to the automotive industry and especially people on the assembly line who are lookin to reshore this manufacturing.

But the thing that's going to be I think would be some consternation for the Governor is that there's been a long lis of local and federal officials who've been pushing for more military resources at Selfridge, and this represents an opportunity for Trump to make the announcement himself and capture a lot of the credit on his own through a hometown audience.

And so I'd be a little bit nervous that if there's going to b a big unveiling right now, where I'm not going to get to be president as an elected official, that, you know, he's going to steal a lot of that spotlight.

What do you think?

I thin what Simon saying makes sense.

And I think that probably that would be the move for Donald Trump is to bring the money, make himself a hometown hero and here in Michigan and really shore up some of that goodwill.

Whether or not he actually does that, I'm not going to try and get in his mind and try and predict that.

Well, I think the hype enough is enough to really advance the story and to see, I think whether or not he doe it here is still the idea that, okay, you have President Trump coming to Macomb County Home o Selfridge Air National Air Base, and you also have this following the heels of that meeting in the White House with Governor Whitmer.

Speaker Hall, when you talked about this a little bit, he said we're going to take care of you.

Speaker Hall seems confiden that Trump is going to take care of Michigan and keep his word.

So I think importantly also that we underestimate the extent to which Trump relies on the rally as an event to sort of read the room and gauge the temperature of his supporters in his base.

And I think Macomb County is a really important test bed for him to try to suss out, you know, 100 days into this administration how people are reacting to this economy.

The level of hype and enthusiasm that he's going to feel in this crowd, I think is probably goin to he's going to read into that.

If I was going to guess, I would guess he'd bring the money you know, and give it the check.

Now, the question is, does the governor show up at the airport to welcome him since they're now the best buds and drinking buddies?

I'm not really.

Yeah.

What do you think?

You don't have to go to the event.

You don't have to go to the event.

But the protocol is that the protocol that the governor of greets presidents regardless.

I mean it would be a great opportunity to at least re renegotiate not renegotiate, relitigate, but to make up for the folder in the face appearance in the white house.

You know, you ca choose how you appear in this.

We could get through one show without having that come up.

Darn.

Okay.

Sorry about that.

Let's call in our guest today, a former state representative from the Kalamazoo area, former Republican and now a vice president fo what's the name of your company?

Fanatics Betting and Gaming.

Great to be back with you, Tim.

It's good to see yo and nice to have you on board.

So let's cut to the chase in a weak moment last night I had originally thought how how fearful is your industry about A.I.

coming in and taking all the fun out of betting?

Are you guys worried about that at all?

Well, that's a fair question.

And I will tell you that AI's come a long way.

It's not to the point where it's determining bets or anything.

You can't go to A.I.

and say, Hey, who's going to win the outcome of this game?

It may give you some statistics, but at the end of the day, it's the same statistics and data that all of our companies are dealing with.

So I'm not sure that we're necessarily worried about it, although it's rapidly advancing just like every other bit of technology.

Well, if it got to the point where it increases the odds of the people usin AI to win and reduce your odds to increase, your odds to lose, now you're concerned.

Yeah, well, always right.

I mean, in that particular case.

But I will say that it's not A.I.

isn't really there.

You could go to Chat GPT right now and put in who's going to win, you know, March Madness.

And basically it's goin to spit out a lot of the seeds.

There may be one or two upsets that come into play, but you're not going to see a lot of that with A.I.

these days.

It doesn't get to the poin where it's absolutely predicting the outcomes of the games.

Cheyna.

I'm curious, so your big push when you were a state lawmaker was to legalize sports betting and to promote sports betting in Michigan and now you work for a sports betting company is coincidence?

Well, you know I figured you may ask that question like here's the reality here's the reality of it.

I was given some great advice when I first came into the legislature, which is become an expert in one thing because you have such finite time there.

And I remember I served in the legislature a long time ago when we had term limits.

A lot of things have change since then, and I will tell you that I'm not sure that the person that gave me that advice meant get involved in casino gaming necessarily but I became a casino in gaming.

I became an expert in casino gaming and sports betting.

And and look, since then which has been a very long time now, I've continued to expand and become an expert in the industry even more.

And I will say that the Michigan model is one that is looked at across the country as being one of th most successful in the country.

And so I get I get folks, lawmakers, lobbyists, others, casino operators, they come to me and say, why is Michigan so successful and what have we done?

What have you done and what have others done in the state to make sure that it continues to be successful?

I mean, you're looking at over $2.1 billion that have come into the state since 2019.

That's a massive amount of money.

And remember 65% of that goes to education.

At the end of the day, this is we're looking at almost 48, $50 million a month that are coming in, 30 plus million dollars.

It's going to education.

This is a massiv amount of money that's come in.

So it's become a very successful model.

And people across the country always ask me, Michigan's great, how did you do it?

How can we replicate the same thing?

But on the flip side of that, you know, when you loo at the proliferation of sports betting and the gaming industry in Michigan, there is also an increase that comes with that.

In gambling addiction, Right.

How do you sort of balance that public health issue against some of the extra revenu that the state may be taking in?

Well, now, that's a fantastic question.

And I will tell you this, that what we're seeing nationally is about what stacks up in Michigan, which are 2 to 3% of players have some sort of addiction.

And that varies at different levels.

But of course, that's th addiction amounts that we see.

And the money that I talked about, the 65% of the revenue that comes in that gets portioned off to the iGaming fund, which does go to fund not only education but treatment and addiction treatment services, as well as there's money there that goes towards cancer that the cancer presumption fund for firefighters.

I mean, look, Michigan is investing and continues to invest.

Henry Williams has done a fantastic job, are chair of the Michigan Gaming Control Board of making sure that he continues to pour more more money into addiction treatment services.

But the answer is very simple, which is look, at the end of the day, more can always be done and more should be done.

one of the thing that I've seen in other states that that, you know, and I just had more time in Michigan to work on this issu that I think is very interesting is they've got a gaming treatment court and that's a specialty court for people that have committed a crime because it had something to do with a gaming addiction.

Maybe they, you know, committe a financial crime or something.

And this gaming addiction court gets people back on the right track.

It's kind of like a drug treatment court.

Something like that is great.

And I think states should continue to you know, explore new options.

But isn't the best wa to make sure that people don't have this gambling addiction or, you know, prevent going so far with their gambling addiction is to not make gambling so accessible.

I mean, you can do it from your couch now.

Yeah.

And think you're absolutely right.

But here's the reality of it.

You're going to be able to do it anyway.

In these state that don't have online casino, there are just a plethora of options that exist.

You can get on the open your phone, go to Google type in blackjack poker in any state that doesn' authorize online casino today, you are able to play.

And so the reality of it is is that why not have the protections in place the treatment services in place, the money coming into the state to be able to help people is really the reality of it.

If you just have these, you know, offshore actors that operate in the marketplace without any restrictions, you're just going to have people that are unfortunately going to get sucked into this syste in this cycle without any help.

And that's really what having the regulation and laws in place.

Really, at the end of the day, sometimes I know it can seem counterintuitive, but that at the end of the day actually helps people.

We're in a moment when a lot of states are wondering about the certainty of their federal funding.

Online gaming and sport betting is a way for some states to really supplement some of that revenue.

How much of that is part of your push when you go to other states and try to convince them to open up their casino laws?

Yeah, that's a big conversation that's happening across the country right now.

These states are scared, especially states that are taking a lot of federal funding, states like Louisiana, you know, Vermont.

I have these conversations in these states.

They bring in a tremendous amount of federal revenue and they are scared.

And the reality of it is, is that this is an opportunity for them to supplement new revenue into their states without having to go back to their citizens and ask them for more money.

This is a new avenue.

And so it's a conversation that's out there.

It's a conversation that I'm having regularly.

And look, I mean, it's it's it's a tougher issue for all the reasons that we sort of talked about from a political perspective.

If you remember in Michigan this took me probably six years, five or six years of my six year career to pass.

This isn't something that happens overnight, but with the education, it can get done and it can be a huge boon for states.

Right now.

We're also in this climate where it seems like sports betting is almost omnipresent.

You know, it doesn't matter what state you go to, whatever game you watch, even if you're not in a state that has sports betting, it seems like you're still seeing Bet MGM or Caesar's Palace betting app ads.

What are the biggest obstacles right now to expanding sports betting, and how close are we to seeing something maybe nationally or versus this patchwork of state by state legalization?

Well, that's very interesting.

So right now you're right.

You've got 39 state plus the District of Columbia, which have authorized some version of sports betting, be it online, retail, where you go in in person, place, a wager, something like that.

So, look, we're getting close in terms of all the states.

Now, some of the big ones out there, California, Texas, still have yet to legalize.

And it may be a while because in all of these states that are left, there are some very tricky political nuances as to why it hasn't gotten done yet.

You know, you've got 109 tribes in the state of California, for example.

As you can imagine, there's 109 differences of opinion as to how to get sports betting done in that particular state.

But but, look, I mean, it's I think it's coming from a federal perspective.

You know, that's something that we as an industry, we have always said doesn't make a lot of sense for the industry.

And the reality of it is, is states gaming has always been a states rights issue.

And when PASBA was overturned six years ago to allow states to determine whether or not they wanted to do sports betting that was based on that court decision was based on states rights.

And and so for the federal government to step in now, I think would create even more chaos.

Even though you do have a patchwork and separate framework, you have a patchwork and separate framework for allowing some states allow gaming subsidies don't represent.

While the states may be looking at this, the effect on the economy doesn't have an impact on the consumer.

Are there?

Some people will say, you know what, with all that uncertainty in Washington, maybe I shouldn't be placing a bet.

Have you picked up on that as well?

Well, first off, I'm being called representative in a very long time, Tim.

So I think I was thrown off by the question over there anyway, that that being the case, look, yes, there is there's uncertainty out there right now.

There's uncertainty in the marketplace just in general.

I think that there's concern, as I talk to folks, that the tariff issues the stock market, people are concerned.

I saw some numbers just last week that showed that Vegas in terms of tourism has been down the past three weeks.

I think that that is just an indicator of the economy where people are a bit nervous right now.

They're a bit unsure about kin of what's going to happen next.

But, you know I think would like everything.

It's an entertainment product and folks set aside dollars for entertainment, whether it's to travel and get on a plane and go to Vegas and enjoy it, whether it's to stay in your hometown, go to the city of Detroit, for example, and participate.

People have always go entertainment dollars available, hopefull for entertainment experiences.

If I could ask briefly, when you were serving in the state legislature, you're one of the closest friends and associates of the former House Speaker, Lee Chatfield, and he's currently under criminal indictment for a host of legal charges related to his use of dark money funds.

I know that you traveled on some of these trips with the former House speaker.

Can you talk to me abou your experience on those trips and what you think about the charges he's facing?

Well, that's I can talk to you about gaming at the end of the day.

And I will tell you that I it's been a long time since I served.

You're right.

I was very close with Lee.

It's it's difficult to see what he and his family have gone through.

And I wish him all the best with that.

The reality is, at the end of the day, I probably learned a lot about gaming and I continue to learn a lot, a lot about gaming.

And that in in in my experience is now a post by legislative career.

So do you think he's getting a bum rap?

It's look it's tough I've seen all I know is sort of what's public out there.

I in fact I don't even have a Detroit News subscription anymore.

So what's behind a paywall I can't even see.

And it's tough.

It's I' sure it's tough on his family.

It's been a long time.

And it I'd be tough on anybody, I imagine.

Was it was there ever a point in your forced march to get this legalized in Michigan where you thought, this is this is going down the tubes it's just not going to happen?

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

I was I very vividly remember when Governor Snyder vetoed this legislation and on his way out the door in 2018, after I had worked so hard with the Senate and the House to get it done, and then Governor Whitmer came in and she she saved the day with me.

At the end of the day on this, it was it was it was trying times.

I thought I was going to throw in the towel a couple of times on this.

As I say I feels like my six year career.

I worked on i my the entirety of my six years.

And it's been great for Michigan.

The reality of it is is that it continues to deliver.

It continues to deliver for students.

The city of Detroit.

And and I'm very proud of what we created.

Is Michigan ahead of the pack of all the other states and how they're doing this.

Michigan is number two i the country behind New Jersey.

And in fact, I learned just today I was I was looking this morning that some numbers out of the American Gaming Association, Detroit actually ranked eighth in the country as it stacks u against other states and cities which have gaming.

And so what Michigan is, i always been a big gaming state, hopefully will continue to be a big gaming state.

It's great for the economy, it's great for the citizens.

And it's it's been great for the state.

So I assume you're not coming back to Michigan to run for office again?

No.

I heard you all talking about all the different candidates earlier.

I doubt that I'm not doing I'm living in Florida now and I absolutely love it.

Do you miss us?

Of course.

I always miss you, Tim.

You know, our relationship goes back about a decade now.

I can't believe that.

But somehow I got old.

And I didn't.

All right.

Thank you, Representative.

It's good to see you down in in Tampa, Florida.

Now, have a safe weekend.

Nice to meet you also.

Thanks to our great panel.

More off the record right here next week.

Please come back.

Production of Off the Record is made possible in par by bellwether public relations, a full servic strategic communications agency partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and issue advocacy.

Learn more at bellwetherpr.com For more off the record, visit wkar.org Michigan Public Television stations have contributed to the production costs of off the record.