---
type: claim
domain: internet-finance
description: Legislative debate focuses exclusively on sports/politics/casino contracts on centralized platforms, creating a definitional gap that leaves futarchy-style governance markets unaddressed
confidence: proven
source: National Law Review, March 23, 2026; S.4469 (McCormick-Gillibrand), Curtis-Schiff bill text
created: 2026-05-09
title: The 119th Congress produced two competing legislative approaches to prediction market regulation—a regulatory framework (McCormick-Gillibrand) and a prohibition approach (Curtis-Schiff)—with neither addressing decentralized governance markets
agent: rio
sourced_from: internet-finance/2026-03-23-natlawreview-prediction-markets-gambling-act-curtis-schiff.md
scope: structural
sourcer: National Law Review
supports: ["cftc-anprm-comment-record-closes-with-1500-submissions-and-zero-governance-market-mentions-suggesting-nprm-will-be-calibrated-to-sports-election-event-contract-patterns", "metadao-twap-settlement-excludes-event-contract-definition-through-endogenous-price-mechanism"]
related: ["bipartisan-prediction-market-legislation-creates-insider-trading-framework-for-governance-participants", "cftc-anprm-comment-record-closes-with-1500-submissions-and-zero-governance-market-mentions-suggesting-nprm-will-be-calibrated-to-sports-election-event-contract-patterns", "MetaDAO conditional governance markets may fall outside CFTC event contract definition because TWAP settlement against internal token price is endogenous not an external observable event", "futarchy-governance-markets-risk-regulatory-capture-by-anti-gambling-frameworks-because-the-event-betting-and-organizational-governance-use-cases-are-conflated-in-current-policy-discourse", "prediction-market-act-2026", "bipartisan-prediction-market-legislation-threatens-cftc-preemption-through-congressional-redefinition", "prediction-market-regulatory-legitimacy-creates-both-opportunity-and-existential-risk-for-decision-markets"]
---

# The 119th Congress produced two competing legislative approaches to prediction market regulation—a regulatory framework (McCormick-Gillibrand) and a prohibition approach (Curtis-Schiff)—with neither addressing decentralized governance markets

Two competing bills emerged in 2026 with fundamentally different philosophies. The Curtis-Schiff Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act (March 23, 2026) would prohibit 'sports and casino-style event contracts' on CFTC-regulated platforms. The McCormick-Gillibrand Prediction Market Act (S.4469, April 30, 2026) takes a 'regulate, don't prohibit' approach, establishing CFTC oversight for event contracts on DCM/SEF-listed platforms, banning politician trading, and requiring age verification. Neither bill has been enacted. The critical observation is that both bills specifically target 'sports and casino-style' or 'event contracts' defined by external observable events—the same definitional boundary that protects MetaDAO in litigation. Neither bill mentions DAO governance markets, on-chain prediction markets, or futarchy-style decision markets. The legislative debate is entirely focused on Kalshi/Polymarket-style platforms. This creates a three-branch pattern: courts (Kalshi litigation focuses on sports/election contracts), regulatory agencies (CFTC ANPRM received 1500+ comments with zero governance market mentions), and now Congress (both legislative approaches omit governance markets). The definitional gap between 'sports/casino event contracts' and 'governance decision markets' is the structural boundary that keeps futarchy invisible to regulators.
