Can You Bet On U.S. Politics & Elections?
Gambling on political or current events, including elections, is quasi-legal in the United States.
While some other countries, including several in Europe, explicitly authorized gambling markets on global politics, the U.S. has not.
Still, some websites—including, for example, PredictIt and Kalshi—have so far found a way to circumvent state gambling law to offer real-money gambling on elections. Kalshi and PredictIt allow gamblers to risk money by trading “shares” in a method akin to stock market trading. Many people have fallen prey to addiction on websites like PredictIt and Kalshi.
So far, the federal courts haven’t blocked this form of election gambling. In fact, just days before the 2024 presidential election, Kalshi scored a court victory over its business and immediately flooded various social media channels with ads about gambling on the election. Following the Kalshi ruling, the stock-trading platform Robinhood began facilitating election trades.
Other websites, such as the prominent Bovada, allow sportsbook-style gambling on politics in violation of state law. Several states have taken legal action against these offshore sportsbooks.
More than 30 states have legalized sports betting through approved apps and websites, but no state has yet approved wagering on politics. However, Ontario, Canada, directly north of the U.S., has allowed its licensed sportsbooks, such as FanDuel and DraftKings, to take political bets. Those sportsbooks are eager to take election bets in the U.S.
In addition, there are cryptocurrency-based gambling sites that take political bets in apparent violation of state gambling law. Still, Polymarket, arguably the most prominent crypto-gambling site taking U.S. election bets, was forced out of the U.S. market in a 2022 settlement with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). It’s rumored that gambling platforms banned in the U.S. can still be accessed through virtual private networks (VPNs).
Lawmakers Seek to Ban Election Betting
Politics gambling is highly controversial to many lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
In late 2024, representatives Jamie Raskin (MD-08) and Andrea Salinas (OR-06) introduced the Ban Gambling on Elections Act to prohibit betting on U.S. elections. The bill is the House companion to Senator Jeff Merkley’s (D-OR) legislation in the Senate.
The legislation would amend the Commodity Exchange Act—a law regulating the trading of commodities and futures in the U.S.—to prohibit political election wagering of any kind.
“With distrust in our electoral system at an all-time high, we must crack down on gambling in all U.S. elections,” said Rep. Raskin. “Our democracy demands reliable and transparent processes to cast ballots and tally results, not a horse race clouded by gambling odds and bets placed. I am proud to go all-in with Congresswoman Salinas and Senator Merkley in calling on Congress to ante up and pass this common-sense legislation.”
In a statement, Rep. Salinas said he will also seek to provide more federal resources for gambling addiction treatment and research.
“While sports betting and online gambling have become permanent forms of American entertainment, we must acknowledge and help mitigate the harm caused by related addictions,” he said.
Sen. Merkley said that election gambling can incentivize “funding late-cycle smear campaigns” that erode trust in the democratic system.
“It’s like betting on a baseball game when you control the umpire,” Merkley added.
According to Dennis Kelleher, president of the think tank Better Markets, the CFTC is poorly equipped to regulate election gambling, which would include establishing safeguards to protect problem gamblers.
“Gamblers also should not be allowed to unleash gambling on American elections by sneaking it in through the back door of the CFTC, which has no expertise, experience, or ability to regulate or police election gambling,” Kelleher said.
Addiction Risks with Election Betting
GamblingHarm.org is unaware of any research into how addictive election betting is relative to, for example, wagering on March Madness or the NFL.
According to our analysis of the sports betting addiction statistics, 30-40% of online sports bettors experience problems with their wagering. Betting on real-life events is highly addictive.
Could election betting be even more addictive? Possibly, as elections are highly emotional events. Every person in the country already has so-called “skin in the game,” even in the absence of wagering. Adding the element of gambling could elevate the emotional toll of a high-stakes U.S. election and, in turn, boost the risks of addiction.
This emotional investment is a big reason why NFL gambling could have the highest addiction rate among all sports.
Political news coverage is saturated with so-called insider scoops, giving observers (and potentially election gamblers) the unfounded feeling that they can better predict these outcomes than the result of a sports contest.
If election betting becomes more common in the U.S., we can expect to gather more insights into just how devastating the activity can be for millions of people susceptible to gambling problems.
Image from Thor Deichmann from Pixabay