Key facts
- Most Americans oppose using prediction markets to bet on U.S. elections, military actions, and government policy announcements.
- A Reuters/Ipsos poll found 69% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans oppose betting on election results via prediction markets.
- Sixty-five percent of Americans opposed prediction market betting on U.S. military actions.
- The poll found 63% of Americans opposed betting on government policy announcements or decisions.
- Policymakers are debating how to regulate prediction markets due to concerns about insider trading and manipulation.
- Kalshi banned former Republican congressman George Santos for betting on whether he would attend the State of the Union address.
Most Americans oppose using prediction markets to bet on U.S. elections and other government actions, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll, indicating potential public resistance to the growing industry as regulators consider its oversight.
The poll, conducted from September 30 to October 5, revealed that a bipartisan majority of Americans are against wagering on election results, military actions, and government policy announcements. Specifically, 69% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans opposed betting on election outcomes. Betting on U.S. military actions was opposed by 65% of Americans, while 63% opposed betting on government policy decisions. Only a small percentage, 8% and 9% respectively, supported such bets.
Prediction markets, such as those offered by Polymarket and Kalshi, allow users to bet on a wide range of events. Policymakers have raised concerns that these platforms could facilitate insider trading and market manipulation. Companies like Polymarket and Kalshi assert they have controls in place to prevent misconduct and argue their markets can offer accurate forecasts and ways to hedge risks.
However, the poll results suggest widespread discomfort with the commodification of real-world events. Even betting on professional sports, a more established activity, was opposed by 43% of respondents. Concerns about national security and election integrity have fueled debate, with some policymakers worried that insiders could use confidential information for trades. Reuters previously reported that accounts on Polymarket's overseas market may have traded on inside military information, and Kalshi has suspended candidates for betting on their own races.
In response to these concerns, the Senate barred senators, staff, and other officers from using prediction markets in April, and several Democratic lawmakers have proposed legislation to restrict the industry. Kalshi states it does not allow trading on military operations and bars political candidates from wagering on their own races, and both companies say they cooperate with authorities and implement restrictions to mitigate misconduct.
The debate over regulation also involves whether prediction markets constitute financial instruments or gambling. While the Trump administration's Commodity Futures Trading Commission has asserted jurisdiction, viewing them as financial products, state regulators argue they are gambling and should be subject to state laws. Three-quarters of Americans agreed that using prediction markets for real-world events is a form of gambling.