House Hearing Examines Sports Betting Risks on Campuses

US lawmakers examined the effects of sports betting on college students during a House hearing that also raised concerns about prediction markets and player proposition bets.

The November 11 hearing, titled “The Rise of Sports Gambling on College Campuses,” was held by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce’s Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development.

Subcommittee chair Michael Baumgartner said:

“Online sportsbooks and prediction market apps have placed miniature casinos in the palms of our hands, making placing a bet as easy as checking the weather,”

He also highlighted college prop betting.

“Sports betting, in particular proposition bets on college athletics, I do think needs to be addressed,” Baumgartner said during the hearing. “It exposes students to harassment and has even called into question the integrity of college athletics.”

Prediction Markets Draw Regulatory Scrutiny

Rep. Alma Adams argued that prediction markets can offer sports-related products without following the same state rules applied to licensed sportsbooks.

“Those laws reflect the judgment of voters and their elected representatives. Prediction markets have blown a hole straight through them,” she said in her opening statement.

Adams pointed to Kalshi and Polymarket, where users aged 18 and older can trade sports event contracts. Most state-regulated sportsbooks require customers to be at least 21.

She also questioned the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s oversight after the NCAA asked for college sports prediction markets to be suspended until more safeguards are introduced.

“The CFTC is supposed to be the cop on the beat. The NCAA has asked it to suspend college sports prediction markets until real safeguards are in place. Instead, the cop seems to have left the beat, so we have to ask why,” Adams said.

Massachusetts Gaming Commission chair Jordan Maynard said the coexistence of state-regulated sportsbooks and federally regulated prediction markets has created inconsistent standards.

“We have basically two sets of standards for a product that looks exactly the same to the end user.”

Maynard said his commission has also received complaints involving prediction-market companies it does not regulate.

Rep. Adelita Grijalva raised concerns about tribal gaming rights.

“Innovation should not come at the expense of consumer safety or tribal sovereignty,” Grijalva said, according to NEXT.io.

The discussion followed recent court disputes involving sports event contracts, including a federal order barring Kalshi from offering them on the lands of several California tribes.

Witnesses Support Limits on College Player Props

Player-specific proposition bets were another major focus of the hearing.

Ole Miss associate professor Dr. Daniel Durkin said:

“I would agree with eliminating prop bets, particularly for college sports,” Durkin said at the hearing. “I think that would go a long way toward (prevention).”

Durkin described harassment directed at athletes after losing bets, including Venmo requests and threats tied to parlays.

Maynard said Massachusetts’ ban on individual college player props has helped reduce those risks.

“If you don’t have to face someone who’s placed a bet on you, that to me has to naturally help,” Maynard said.

University of Michigan chief mental health officer Lindsey Mortenson also said eliminating player props could reduce opportunities for athletes to manipulate parts of their performance for betting purposes.

Durkin stressed the importance of prevention education.

“The things we need to do with our prevention is teach (students) that just like with alcohol, drugs, and some of the other things we teach them about, this behavior has risks, and you need to be aware of it and make an informed decision about what you’re doing,” Durkin said.

Cindy Clouner of Ohio State University supported stronger federal involvement.

“Having a stronger federal regulatory lens can help because those state patchwork laws still put our players at risk, even in states where we are not able to gamble on our own athletes,” Clouner said.

Colleges Face Broader Gambling Risks

The hearing also covered problem gambling, financial stress and access to campus support.

Baumgartner cited a 2023 NCAA survey showing that 67% of students living on campus had bet on sports. Sixteen percent reported behaviors associated with problem gambling, while 6% said they had lost more than $500 in a single day.

Mortenson told lawmakers that gambling problems can remain difficult to detect until students face serious financial or mental health consequences.

Durkin said Ole Miss had recorded only six gambling-related counseling referrals as of November 5, despite research indicating broader gambling participation among students.

Witnesses called for earlier intervention and better awareness of available treatment and prevention programs. Sports betting advertising and offshore operators were also discussed as lawmakers considered the limits of the current regulatory framework.

The hearing underscored growing concern about how sports wagering reaches college-age consumers through both traditional sportsbooks and prediction-market platforms, while lawmakers continue debating the appropriate balance between state and federal oversight.