By Ed Kowalski
New York collected $1.3 billion in tax revenue from online sports betting this year.
That is not pocket change. It is enough money to make even the most seasoned Albany politician briefly pause—before figuring out how to spend every last dime of it.
Since online sports betting was legalized in 2022, the industry has generated approximately $8.3 billion in gross revenue. New York imposed one of the most aggressive tax structures in the nation and watched the money pour into state coffers.
So, here is the question every New York taxpayer should be asking:
If Albany keeps finding new sources of revenue, why does living in New York never become more affordable?
The answer is painfully simple: Albany does not view additional revenue as an opportunity to reduce the burden on taxpayers. It views additional revenue as permission to spend more.
This year’s enacted state budget is estimated at an astonishing $277 billion—a 7% increase over the previous year. The state comptroller has warned that spending is projected to exceed revenue throughout the financial plan, raising serious questions about New York’s long-term fiscal sustainability. (osc.ny.gov)
Only in Albany can the state collect billions more, spend billions more and then congratulate itself for fighting “affordability.”
Apparently, the government’s definition of affordability is taking more of your money, running it through an enormous state bureaucracy and eventually returning a portion of it through a carefully branded program bearing a politician’s name.
That is not tax relief.
That is a political rebate program.
New York collected $127.5 billion in state taxes during the last fiscal year—nearly $10 billion more than the year before and $2.3 billion above projections. Yet total state spending still climbed to almost $259 billion, an increase of $17.5 billion in just one year. (osc.ny.gov)
Read those numbers again.
Tax collections rose by nearly $10 billion, but spending increased by $17.5 billion.
That is not a revenue problem. It is a spending problem.
If a family in Pleasant Valley handled its household finances that way, the credit cards would eventually be declined. If a small business in Dutchess County consistently allowed expenses to grow faster than income, it would close its doors.
Albany, however, never has to confront those consequences immediately. It can raise taxes, increase fees, borrow money and pass the bill to people who have no choice but to pay it.
Even the state comptroller warned earlier this year that projected spending was growing faster than anticipated revenue. At that point, cumulative budget gaps were expected to reach $27.5 billion through the 2030 fiscal year. The enacted budget only increased the concern. (osc.ny.gov)
Meanwhile, state agency overtime reached $1.6 billion in 2025—an increase of nearly 23% in a single year. The state workforce also grew for the third consecutive year. (osc.ny.gov)
There are legitimate reasons for government spending. We need functioning schools, safe roads, reliable infrastructure, responsible healthcare programs and support for people who truly need it.
This is not an argument for eliminating essential services.
It is an argument for demanding priorities.
Albany’s defenders will point to uncertainty surrounding federal funding and argue that New York must spend more to protect vulnerable residents. Federal decisions may indeed create difficult choices. But uncertainty is precisely when responsible leaders control recurring expenses, eliminate ineffective programs, strengthen oversight and distinguish genuine needs from political wish lists.
Instead, Albany continues expanding spending while weakening the very accountability mechanisms that might help taxpayers understand where their money is going.
The comptroller warned that billions of dollars in proposed state spending could be removed from independent oversight and competitive procurement requirements. When government is spending more than ever, taxpayers should be receiving greater transparency—not less. (osc.ny.gov)
The sports-betting windfall makes the absurdity especially clear.
This revenue does not magically appear. It comes from money wagered—and often lost—by New Yorkers. Albany encourages the activity, advertises the tax revenue and then spends the proceeds as though it found a bag of cash on the steps of the Capitol.
There is also something troubling about a government becoming financially dependent upon its citizens gambling more. Once that revenue is folded into ever-growing budgets, Albany has a vested interest in keeping the bets—and the losses—coming.
At the very least, unexpected revenue should be used to reduce debt, strengthen reserves or provide permanent, broad-based tax relief. It should not become another excuse to create programs that require even more spending next year.
New Yorkers are not demanding a government that does nothing. We are asking for one that understands the difference between spending and solving.
We are asking elected officials to measure success by results rather than announcements, press conferences and the size of the next budget.
We are asking why every new tax, fee, gambling program and revenue windfall disappears into Albany without ever making life noticeably easier for the people supplying the money.
Most of all, we are asking a question Albany seems determined to avoid:
How much is enough?
For the political class, the answer is apparently always the same:
Just a little more.
For the taxpayers of New York, however, “a little more” has become far too much.
Affordability will not be achieved by expanding government in our name. It will begin when Albany learns to leave more of our money where it belongs—in our own pockets.
The Valley Viewpoint 