Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to better inform the public debate surrounding sports wagering legalization in California. I review existing U.S. sports wagering markets for accessibility, pricing, and other notable characteristics. Then, I propose three markets suitable to California: (1) Tribal exclusivity with protectionism (Tribal), (2) Fully enabled commercial sports wagering (Commercial), and (3) State lottery administered monopoly with revenue sharing (Lottery). Using comparative alternatives matrix (CAM) analysis, I examine these market structures for political feasibility, socially responsible accessibility, and market pricing. Results: Tribal 3.4, Commercial 3.0, Lottery 2.4. Tribal does not have too much opposition or too little support, offers limited access to wagers, forgoes maximizing tax revenues in favor of more equitable social outcomes, creates a competitive market between tribes, and can undermine the illegal black market. By integrating sports wagering into existing tribal gaming compacts, tribal gaming exclusivity is maintained, brick-&-mortar casinos are not undermined, access is more limited than commercial or lottery markets, and the spirit of gaming as an economic means for tribes is upheld.