At a Senate Committee on Indian Affairs roundtable on August 4, tribal gaming leaders and Ohio's Solicitor General called on Congress to swiftly intervene against the rise of sports prediction markets. Key testimonies came from notable figures in the tribal gaming community, including Tehassi Hill, Vice Chairman of the Indian Gaming Association (IGA), Jamie Hummingbird, Chairman of the National Tribal Gaming Commissioners & Regulators (NTGCR), Dr. Harry Levant, Director of Gambling Policy at the Public Health Advocacy Institute, Mark Macarro, President of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), and Mathura Sridharan, Solicitor General of Ohio.
Central to the discussion was the argument that sports event contracts are essentially the same as sports betting, thus undermining the authority of state gaming operations and tribal exclusivity, potentially damaging tribal revenues. Hill criticized prediction market platforms, particularly calling out Kalshi and Polymarket, stating, “They claim to be innovators, but they have invented nothing. Prediction markets offer bets identical to those of legal, regulated sportsbooks: moneylines, totals, parlays, prop bets. The difference is that prediction markets avoid our regulatory systems to protect consumers and the integrity of American sports.”
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), the committee's Vice Chair, echoed this sentiment during his opening remarks, quoting a federal judge’s assessment of pending litigation: "It looks like gambling to me." He further pointed out that the consumer experience remains unchanged whether through a gambling app or a prediction market app, leading to concerns over the distinction between the two.
Tribal leaders have consistently opposed prediction markets via various channels since last year. Hill emphasized that, “No one voted for this. Congress did not pass a law. This is happening because one person has declared that online sports gambling is legal in every state, including Hawaii and Alaska, and on every Indian reservation.” This “one person” is Michael Selig, Chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), whose agency proposed a regulatory approach to prediction markets in June that many view as overly permissive.
The roundtable also addressed concerns about the CFTC's lack of full staffing, with Selig currently the only commissioner. Macarro criticized this as “an abomination,” stressing the need for a fully-staffed commission to adequately oversee the complex issues at hand.
In her opening remarks, committee chair Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) noted that she and Schatz had previously contacted the CFTC, urging the agency to engage in extensive consultations with tribal representatives. The tribal leaders underscored a glaring omission: the CFTC's advancement of products similar to gaming without formally consulting with tribes, which they contend could severely impact tribal economies and legal rights.
Macarro pointed out the potential repercussions, arguing that the move could lead to the loss of millions of dollars in revenue, job losses, and cuts to essential support services for tribes. Schatz added gravity to this warning, stating, “What is about to happen to Indian country’s revenue pales in comparison to anything that we could do to replace it.”
Witnesses advised Congress on actions it could take, advocating for the "Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act" to ban event contracts related to sports betting or casino-style games. They also urged support for the pending CLARITY Act to include prohibitions on sports prediction markets and to halt what they termed “the outrageous CFTC rule proposal.”
Sridharan, involved in ongoing legal challenges against Kalshi in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, reflected on the suitability of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) in relation to prediction markets, arguing for a fundamental review of whether it adequately encompasses sports betting. She called for a clear definition ensuring that these new financial markets do not enable gaming prediction markets as they are currently structured.
She emphasized the importance of not dismissing the states’ considerable experience in managing gambling—a crucial aspect that arises from the challenges presented by prediction markets. If Congress decides federal regulation is necessary, she insisted that it must build on state regulations rather than supplant them.
