House Democrats introduced the Banning Games on Deaths and Elections Act (DEATH BETS Act) this week, with Rep. Jamie Raskin leading the House effort. The move follows high-profile disputes over prediction markets, including Polymarket’s more than $3.6 billion in bets during the 2024 presidential cycle and $679 million in conflicting results between Kalshi and Polymarket over a Supreme Leader contract. Sen. Adam Schiff and Rep. Mike Levin unveiled a companion bill under the Commodity Exchange Act.
House Democrats introduced the Banning Games on Deaths and Elections Act this week, with Representative Jamie Raskin leading the House effort. Senator Adam Schiff and Representative Mike Levin unveiled a companion bill under the Commodity Exchange Act. Raskin described election gambling contracts as a direct threat to democratic integrity, and the House measure forms part of a coordinated legislative push.
If either bill passes committee, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission could delist contracts tied to war and death events; if both bills stall, the agency would continue to operate under its currently ambiguous mandate. The bills would explicitly prohibit event contracts tied to assassinations, military strikes, or election outcomes, and they reference the CFTC’s use of ‘contrary to the public interest’ to block listings. Kalshi previously won a legal ruling allowing it to resume U.S. election betting, but the proposed act could reverse that outcome.
Kalshi and Polymarket have faced significant regulatory controversies over their prediction market contracts. Kalshi voided its Supreme Leader contract due to a technicality in the language, leading to a market conflict where Polymarket settled its bet, resulting in $679 million in conflicting outcomes. This drew regulatory scrutiny over the predictability and legality of such markets.
Kalshi won a legal battle that allowed it to continue U.S. election betting; however, the introduction of the DEATH BETS Act could potentially reverse this decision if passed. Meanwhile, Polymarket demonstrates continued dominance in global prediction markets, having facilitated more than $3.6 billion in bets during the 2024 presidential cycle alone.
This legislative environment highlights ongoing debates about the regulation of prediction markets and their impact on democratic processes.
Reports indicated about half a billion dollars was bet on the timing of U.S. military strikes on Iran. Research reported that insiders profited significantly from these bets, including one trader who earned $553,000 from a contract tied to the assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei. Another reported example described a suspected military insider who won $90,000 after correctly predicting nine separate military events. These reported transactions and profits have drawn regulatory scrutiny and have been central to debates over market integrity in prediction platforms.
This summary lists reported insider-trading allegations and the specific reported outcomes cited in coverage of these markets. The figures above reflect reported outcomes from that coverage.
The article outlines recent legislative actions aimed at restricting prediction market contracts tied to deaths and elections, and summarizes the regulatory disputes and market controversies that prompted those proposals. It highlights debates over the scope of regulatory authority, platform governance, and market practices as lawmakers, regulators, and market operators consider potential changes to how such contracts are listed and supervised.
