Campaign Staffers Still Betting on Races Despite Crackdown

Campaign staffers working on U.S. political races continue to use prediction market platforms like Kalshi to bet on election outcomes, even as the company rolls out new monitoring systems designed to prevent insider trading. At least one campaign operative listed in Federal Election Commission records was able to place a trade on a race they were involved in, according to NPR, despite Kalshi’s pledge to block such activity.

The Monitoring Program and Its Gaps

Kalshi, the largest prediction market company, launched a system in May 2026 that cross-references names listed in FEC campaign contribution and expenditure filings against its user logs. The company says it has blocked “dozens” of campaign staffers from betting on their own candidates since the program began.

Robert DeNault, Kalshi’s head of enforcement and legal counsel, described the system’s approach: “If we’re able to identify a potential match, we have markets that are associated with each of the campaigns that are flagged, and those individuals would be prevented from placing trades on those markets.”

Yet the system has clear limitations. At least one campaign operative listed in FEC records was still able to trade on a race they were involved in, speaking to NPR on condition of anonymity for fear of employment consequences. The gap highlights a fundamental problem: FEC data is not comprehensive.

Two former FEC commissioners told NPR that while Kalshi’s program is a constructive step, it cannot catch everyone. Sean Cooksey, who chaired the FEC during the 2024 election, noted: “While I think this data may be helpful in giving some picture about who is working on a particular campaign, it is by no means a complete one. It is not a complete list of every person who does any kind of work for the campaign.”

Lee E. Goodman, a former FEC commissioner who served from 2013 to 2018, agreed: “It is a constructive step. However, it’s not a panacea because it still leaves many people who are involved in campaigns who will not show up on FEC reports.”

FEC filings miss volunteers, lawyers, pollsters, subcontractors, and staffers on campaigns that do not file electronically. State and local elections use separate disclosure mechanisms entirely, creating additional blind spots. Kalshi’s DeNault acknowledged the company is working to expand monitoring to local elections but provided no timeline.

A Broader Pattern of Insider Trading

The revelations come amid a surge in prediction market popularity. Platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket now settle billions of dollars in weekly volume on American political outcomes. In the first quarter of 2026 alone, Kalshi launched more than 150 investigations into insider trading, blocked more than 100 moves, and referred at least 20 cases to law enforcement, according to spokesperson Jacki McGavick. Polymarket has made nearly 100 referrals across all its markets, including one that resulted in arrest.

The problem extends beyond staffers. In April, Kalshi fined and suspended three congressional candidates — Matt Klein, Zeke Enriquez, and Mark Moran — for betting on their own races, as AP News reported. A federal indictment in the same month charged U.S. Army Master Sergeant Gannon Ken Van Dyke with using classified information about the operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to trade on Polymarket, generating more than $409,000 in profits.

Regulatory Vacuum

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the industry’s federal regulator, has done little to police prediction markets under the Trump administration. Trump-appointed CFTC Chairman Michael Selig has defended the platforms against dozens of state lawsuits. The Brennan Center for Justice warned in a June 30 report that election prediction markets could “fuel misinformation and efforts to influence election outcomes” during the 2026 midterms.

Congress has taken notice but failed to act. At least 21 prediction market bills have been introduced in 2026, but none have advanced through the House or Senate. The Senate voted unanimously in April to bar its own members and staffers from betting, but that restriction does not extend to campaign workers. The House Oversight Committee, led by Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), launched an investigation in May and received closed-door briefings from both Kalshi and Polymarket in June. The investigation remains ongoing.

Self-Regulation in the Spotlight

With Congress gridlocked and the CFTC largely passive, Kalshi has positioned itself as the primary enforcer. DeNault made the company’s stance clear: “It is up to us to make rules of the road for our platform, whether Congress does or not. We’ve done that here in an expansive way in that we police all campaign individuals, whether they have insider information or not, from placing trades.”

But critics argue that self-regulation has inherent limits. The Brennan Center report warned that prediction markets could be used to promote false claims of election fraud, allow foreign actors to influence U.S. elections, and undermine trust in electoral outcomes through revelations of insider trading. As the 2026 midterms approach, the gap between the industry’s rapid growth and the regulatory framework meant to govern it continues to widen.

What to Watch

The House Oversight Committee’s investigation remains the most significant congressional action, but its outcome is uncertain. Meanwhile, Kalshi’s monitoring program, while a step forward, still leaves significant gaps that motivated actors can exploit. With prediction markets becoming an increasingly visible part of the political landscape — through partnerships with CNN and CNBC, and the planned launch of Truth Social’s “Truth Predict” — the pressure for meaningful regulation is likely to intensify.

For now, the burden of enforcement rests largely on the platforms themselves, and as the latest NPR investigation shows, even the most well-intentioned systems can be circumvented.