The Problem Gambling Considerations of Election Betting
As the Presidential election approaches, the conversation surrounding political betting has intensified. While the Commodities and Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has historically prohibited issuing or trading futures contracts on the outcomes of elections, recent court rulings have challenged this ban, leading to a surge in election-related bets. This development raises important questions regarding the overlap between problem gambling and the unique structure of election betting.
One of NCPG’s primary considerations in the context of election betting is the overlap between individuals who gamble and those who engage in trading and their associated harms. Research shows a significant correlation between the two groups, suggesting that individuals who frequently gamble or trade are more likely to experience gambling-related harm. The behaviors and psychological triggers associated with gambling and gambling addiction can also manifest in trading environments. Additionally, the markers of a gambling problem can often go undetected because the high-risk behaviors common in problem gambling are frequently normalized or overlooked in a trading environment, as many don’t recognize trading itself as a form of gambling.
For example, individuals participating in both activities often display similar risk-taking behaviors and decision-making patterns. The thrill of speculation—whether in political outcomes or stock market movements—may lead to excessive engagement, further exacerbating the risk of developing a gambling problem. Gamblers and traders—especially those who are at risk for problems—often wrongly believe that their skills, knowledge or analysis play a more significant role in outcomes than chance or luck. This erroneous belief reflects an illusion of control—when a person believes that they can control or predict complex or random outcomes.
Adding an additional layer of risk is the fact that all election betting is conducted online. Online gambling has been identified as a contributing factor in the increase in problem gambling cases. The anonymity and accessibility of online platforms can make it easier for individuals to place bets impulsively and excessively. As more individuals turn to these platforms for election betting, the risk of gambling-related harm grows.
Although no state gambling commission currently allows sportsbooks to post bets on the election, we’ve learned a lot of lessons from online sports betting that may be applicable. When retail trading apps rose to prominence a few years ago, NCPG urged the companies involved to integrate responsible gambling best practices from our Internet Responsible Gambling Standards. Given the rise of online election betting, it is crucial to examine the need for gambling-related consumer protections. These safeguards are essential in creating a safer environment for individuals and should include limit setting, using player data to detect problematic play, access to self-exclusion options, responsible gambling educational resources, and problem gambling support services.
As we navigate the evolving landscape of election betting, it is imperative to consider the problem gambling implications also at play. The intersection of gambling and trading, the risks associated with online platforms, and the need for effective safeguards all warrant serious attention.