Opinion: Mike Selig’s Stumping for Prediction Markets is Increasingly Incoherent
Credit: Glenn Beck Program
Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chair Mike Selig appeared on Glenn Beck’s talk show and made a number of strange comments while stumping for prediction markets. He sounded a bit lost, saying several things that are either in dispute or outright misleading.
Selig posted on Twitter promoting his appearance and sharing a two-minute clip of his remarks.
“Watch me break things down,” he wrote.
I tuned in, and I’m not sure that’s how I’d describe what I heard.
Prediction Markets on Sports Have Been Around for a Long Time?
In attempting to establish the precedent of prediction markets, Selig said the following:
“Prediction markets on politics, sports, and other things have been around for a long time.”
Prediction markets on politics have been around for a long time. At least, in a limited fashion, thanks to the Iowa Electronic Markets and PredictIt.
As for sports, well, that isn’t so clear. Kalshi began offering sports prediction markets in early 2025, several years after it launched in 2021. For years, it avoided sports due to language in the CFTC rules barring contracts on “gaming,” among other forbidden topics.
Meanwhile, betting exchanges that work a lot like prediction markets have been around for a long time, especially overseas. However, they’re regulated as sports books, because that’s what they are.
When the second Trump administration began, Kalshi felt like it had the institutional backing to begin offering sports event contracts. Nevada responded with a lawsuit months later, beginning the ongoing legal fight that’s continued to this day and seems certain to escalate to a Supreme Court ruling.
CFTC and its ‘Express Authority’ Remains a Legal Debate
According to Selig, the CFTC has “express authority to regulate prediction markets.”
“We’ve had in our statute and the Commodity Exchange Act as well as the securities laws, express authority to regulate these types of financial instruments,” he said. “That covers off any sort of state regulation of these products as gambling. There’s what’s called exclusive jurisdiction for these agencies.”
It’s certainly true that the CFTC has authority to regulate prediction markets. However, once those products began encroaching upon states’ authority to regulate sports betting, it became not at all clear that they “cover off” state regulation.
That’s the very debate raging through courts, and more often than not, the courts have sided with the states thus far. Most recently, sports betting and gaming lawyer Daniel Wallach explained that a New York court ruled in favor of the state because Kalshi failed to demonstrate that it was “the clear and manifest purpose of Congress” to preempt state law.
Selig Frames Casinos as Lightly Regulated
Selig claimed that there’s a “really high bar” to offering prediction markets, which he framed as comparing favorably to the regulation level of casinos.
“There’s investor protections,” he said. “It has to go through what’s called an order book when you’re matched with a counterparty. The exchange then clears that through a clearinghouse. You don’t have any of those protections when you walk into a casino.”
“That’s entertainment.”
In reality, of course, casinos are very heavily regulated at the state level. Compliance is highly important, as casinos risk potentially millions of dollars in fines when they run afoul of regulatory rules. State gaming commissions give customers an outlet in the event of a dispute. Saying that they don’t have protections is strange and untrue.
Sportsbooks ‘Give You Worse Terms’
To close, Selig framed legal and regulated sportsbooks as predatory entities offering “worse terms” than prediction markets.
“Bookies, for example, in most of these casinos, they actually take the other side of your position,” he said. “They’ll bet against you, essentially. So, they’re going to give you worse terms, because they always make money, right?”
It’s probably fair to frame the sportsbooks as predatory. After all, they are trying to take the customer’s money, and they do consistently shield themselves from risk by booting or limiting winners. That part is reasonable enough.
It’s not at all clear that they give the customer “worse terms,” though. One report recently said Kalshi did offer better odds than the sportsbooks over the course of March Madness. However, Citizens reported that sportbook customers bleed money slower than their counterparts using prediction markets.
One of the reasons for that is that professional bettors and sophisticated market makers are on the other side of many trades initiated by retail bettors. The same professional bettors whose business is being turned away by the sportsbooks are the ones “betting against you,” in Selig’s own words. In other words, these entities have sharper models than the sportsbooks.
It’s little surprise they’re beating the retail bettor at a higher rate than the sportsbooks.
Clearly, Selig has been given a mandate to stump for prediction markets. However, his meandering, off-base comments are doing a pretty strange sales job. He either doesn’t understand how sportsbooks and casinos work, or he’s distorting the truth. Either way, it’s not a great look for the chair of a federal regulatory body.
Players trust our reporting due to our commitment to unbiased and professional evaluations of the iGaming sector. We track hundreds of platforms and industry updates daily to ensure our news feed and leaderboards reflect the most recent market shifts. With nearly two decades of experience within iGaming, our team provides a wealth of expert knowledge. This long-standing expertise enables us to deliver thorough, reliable news and guidance to our readers.
Latest News
