Bipartisan Bill Targets Prediction Markets in U.S., Raising Stakes in Sports Betting Debate
By [Your Name], International Correspondent
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A new bipartisan bill introduced in the U.S. Senate could upend the rapidly growing prediction market industry, forcing platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket to halt sports-related wagers or face federal restrictions. The legislation, spearheaded by Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California and Republican Senator John Curtis of Utah, seeks to close what lawmakers describe as a regulatory loophole that allows these platforms to operate nationwide under federal oversight—sidestepping state gambling laws that govern traditional sportsbooks.
The move marks the latest flashpoint in America’s rapidly evolving gambling landscape, where the lines between financial speculation, entertainment, and addiction have blurred since the Supreme Court’s landmark 2018 decision to strike down a federal ban on sports betting. With the industry now worth over $121 billion annually—up from just $4.9 billion before legalization—the debate over who should regulate these markets has intensified, pitting state authorities against federal agencies and legacy casinos against tech-driven startups.
The Bill’s Core Argument: Prediction Markets as Gambling in Disguise
Titled the Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act, the proposed legislation argues that platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket—which allow users to bet on outcomes ranging from election results to Super Bowl scores—are effectively offering sports betting under a different name. Unlike FanDuel and DraftKings, which must comply with state-by-state gambling regulations, prediction markets currently fall under the jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), a federal agency better known for overseeing derivatives trading than gambling activity.
“Sports prediction contracts are sports bets—just with a different name. And yet, these contracts are currently offered in all fifty states in clear violation of state and federal law,” Senator Schiff said in a statement. His concerns echo those of critics who argue that prediction markets exploit regulatory gray areas to attract users who might otherwise engage with state-licensed sportsbooks.
Senator Curtis, a conservative from Utah—one of the few states where gambling remains almost entirely illegal—framed the issue as a public health imperative. “Too many young people in Utah are getting exposed to addictive sports betting and casino-style gaming contracts that belong under state control, not under federal regulators,” he said.
The Explosive Growth of Sports Betting—And Its Consequences
The bill arrives amid unprecedented growth in legalized gambling. Since the Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Murphy v. NCAA, 38 states and Washington, D.C., have legalized sports betting in some form. Major professional sports leagues, once staunch opponents of gambling, now partner with betting companies, embedding odds and promotions into broadcasts. But the rapid expansion has also brought scrutiny: high-profile scandals involving athletes accused of rigging games, money laundering, and insider betting have raised alarms.
Academic research suggests the risks extend beyond corruption. A 2025 study by the University of California, San Diego, analyzed search trends and found that queries for gambling addiction help surged by 61% in states where online sports betting was legalized—a trend that has continued climbing. “The accessibility of these platforms, combined with aggressive marketing, has created a perfect storm for addiction,” said Dr. Jane Whitmore, a public health researcher who co-authored the study.
Prediction markets, however, argue they serve a different purpose. Kalshi, which saw $1 billion in Super Bowl-related trading volume this year—a 2,700% increase from 2025—positions itself as a platform for “event contracts” rather than gambling. “We provide a marketplace for people to hedge risks or express views on real-world outcomes,” said Elisabeth Diana, a Kalshi spokesperson. She accused lawmakers of favoring entrenched casino interests over innovation: “It’s clear this bill is motivated by casino interests that are threatened by competition. They’re more worried about protecting their monopolies than protecting consumers.”
Legal Challenges and the Road Ahead
The bill’s prospects remain uncertain. While it has bipartisan backing, prediction markets are likely to lobby fiercely against it, arguing that federal oversight by the CFTC provides sufficient consumer protections. Meanwhile, Kalshi is already battling legal headwinds: the platform is temporarily banned in Nevada and faces criminal charges in Arizona over alleged violations of state gambling laws.
If passed, the legislation could push users toward unregulated offshore markets—a concern Diana emphasized. “Banning U.S.-regulated platforms won’t stop betting; it will just drive it underground,” she warned.
For now, the debate reflects broader tensions in a country still grappling with the societal impact of gambling’s rapid normalization. As Senator Schiff put it: “This isn’t about innovation—it’s about fairness and accountability.” Whether Congress agrees may determine the future of an industry standing at the intersection of finance, entertainment, and regulation.
— Reporting contributed from Washington, D.C., and San Francisco.
