Bryan Steil seeks prediction market ban for lawmakers

House Republicans have moved to expand a congressional trading ban proposal after Rep. Bryan Steil said prediction market contracts should be included alongside restrictions on stock trading by lawmakers.

According to Bloomberg Government, Steil, who chairs the House Administration Committee, told reporters during a Thursday roundtable that lawmakers are working to add prediction market language to H.R. 7008, a bill that would prohibit members of Congress, their spouses, and dependents from trading individual stocks.

Speaking at the event, Steil said he does not believe lawmakers should be placing trades tied to elections or public policy outcomes. 

His comments indicate that platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi could be brought under the same restrictions being considered for stock transactions.

The legislation was reported out of committee in February and placed on the House calendar, making it eligible for floor consideration. Bloomberg Government reported that Steil expects the House could vote on the measure during the summer.

Under the current version of the bill, lawmakers and their immediate family members would be barred from purchasing publicly traded stocks. Members would also be required to publicly disclose an intent to sell at least seven days before completing a transaction.

Violations would trigger penalties worth either $2,000 or 10% of the investment’s value, whichever amount is larger, along with forfeiture of realized profits.

Although the latest version does not specifically address cryptocurrencies, Steil’s proposal would extend scrutiny to prediction markets at a time when those platforms are drawing attention from lawmakers and regulators.

Prediction markets face growing scrutiny in Washington

Recent congressional concerns have focused on whether people with direct knowledge of future events could gain an advantage in prediction markets.

Last month, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer launched inquiries into Polymarket and Kalshi, arguing that reports of insider trading activity warranted closer examination. According to a statement released by Comer, investigators sought information about user verification procedures, location restrictions, and systems designed to detect suspicious trading behavior.

Questions surrounding market integrity have also surfaced in previous cases. Kalshi disclosed earlier this year that it suspended three political candidates after determining they had traded contracts connected to their own election races, which the company classified as violations of exchange rules.

Separately, federal investigators reviewed trading activity linked to former U.S. Representative George Santos, adding another example cited by critics concerned about participants possessing non-public information.

Consumer protection concerns add pressure

At the same time, another group of lawmakers is asking federal regulators to examine how prediction markets present themselves to the public.

As crypto.news reported earlier, nine House Democrats led by Representatives Kevin Mullin and Gabe Vasquez urged the Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether some prediction market companies present themselves differently in advertising than they do to regulators.

According to the lawmakers, marketing materials have at times used language associated with sports betting, while companies have argued in regulatory proceedings that they offer financial contracts. Mullin said the difference in messaging could leave consumers uncertain about which rules and protections apply.

The request comes as prediction markets continue to expand. Earlier reporting by crypto.news showed that the sector processed roughly 191 million transactions in March while monthly trading volume reached about $23.9 billion. Political, economic, and geopolitical contracts accounted for much of that activity, increasing the industry’s visibility in Washington.

The Democrats have asked the FTC to respond by June 29 and explain whether the agency has received complaints about prediction markets or plans to pursue enforcement actions. Any review would add another regulatory challenge for platforms already facing congressional examination over trading practices and market oversight.