- Details
- By Chez Oxendine
- Gaming
Senate lawmakers from both parties have outlined concerns about the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s proposed rule on prediction markets and its potential effects on tribal authority over gaming. The letters address consultation requirements, jurisdictional questions, and the relationship between federal derivatives regulation and tribal and state gaming systems.
Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, led by Sen. Brian Schatz (D‑Hawaii) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R‑Alaska), sent a letter on July 27 to CFTC Chairman Michael Selig requesting government‑to‑government consultation with tribal nations before the agency advances its rulemaking.
The committee wrote that the CFTC’s outreach to date has not met federal consultation standards and asked the agency to extend its comment deadline.
“Providing tribal nations the same opportunity as the general public to submit written comments does not constitute tribal consultation,” the senators wrote.
A separate letter from Sen. Martin Heinrich (D‑N.M.) and eight additional senators was sent to the Senate Banking Committee and Senate Agriculture Committee. That letter described concerns about prediction markets offering sports and event wagering without tribal or state approval and stated that the CFTC’s jurisdictional position could affect tribal gaming revenues.
Both letters describe potential impacts on tribal regulatory authority and tribal government revenues if prediction markets continue operating under federal derivatives rules without additional safeguards.
The senators requested legislative and regulatory steps to ensure that federal actions do not override tribal gaming compacts or state police powers.
“Prediction markets are misusing federal commodity and derivatives rules to offer nationwide sports and event wagering, completely ignoring state and tribal gaming licenses and regulations,” Heinrich wrote. “If Congress fails to address these concerns imminently, prediction markets will continue to violate tribal sovereignty and states’ rights.”
