Minnesota Senator John Marty Demands NCPG End ‘Unholy Alliance’ With Kalshi

Minnesota state Senator John Marty has called on the National Council on Problem Gambling to sever its financial relationship with Kalshi, arguing that the group’s May 2026 partnership with the prediction market operator conflicts with its mission to protect consumers from gambling harm. In a letter dated July 28 to NCPG Executive Director Heather Maurer, Marty wrote, “No amount of money is worth undermining your mission.”

The dispute centers on a $2 million, two-year investment Kalshi announced in May to fund an NCPG “strategic initiative focused on trader health and safety.” Marty, a member of Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor party, said he understands why the NCPG relies on funding from the regulated gambling industry, but argued Kalshi belongs in a different category entirely because it operates, in his view, as an unauthorized and unregulated gambling business rather than a licensed sportsbook.

A Regulator’s Warning Adds Fuel

Marty’s letter leaned heavily on a separate warning sent to Maurer on July 1 by Michigan Gaming Control Board Executive Director Henry Williams, who described Kalshi’s approach as part of a broader campaign to reshape the gambling industry. “These efforts are part of Kalshi’s broader strategy to remake the gambling industry — by bulldozing countless regulations and the consumer-protection safeguards that Michigan and other states have enacted to protect their residents and uphold the integrity of sports betting,” Williams wrote.

Marty also pushed back on how the NCPG has characterized Kalshi publicly, pointing to a press release describing the company as the “industry leader and pioneer, widely credited with legalizing prediction markets and building a safe, legal, regulated platform for millions of traders in America.” Marty argued that framing is misleading given that sports-related event contracts reportedly make up as much as 85% to 90% of Kalshi’s trading volume, yet the NCPG’s language never mentions sports betting directly. “Claiming something is legal doesn’t mean it is legal and certainly does not mean that they legalized it,” Marty wrote, noting that Kalshi is currently suing Minnesota over a state law that treats its sports-related contracts as illegal gambling, while numerous other states have reached similar conclusions under their own statutes.

NCPG Says It Isn’t Taking Sides on Legality

Maurer defended the partnership by drawing a distinction between legal classification and public health mission. She told CDC Gaming that the NCPG doesn’t take a position on whether Kalshi’s event contracts should be legally defined as gambling, and that the organization’s focus remains squarely on reducing gambling-related harm “wherever it occurs.” She pointed out that the National Problem Gambling Helpline is already fielding calls from people describing harm tied to prediction markets, adding that “individuals and families are experiencing real financial, emotional, and relationship consequences today,” regardless of how the underlying legal and regulatory questions eventually get resolved.

“Our concern is that trading event contracts can carry many of the same behavioral risks associated with gambling,” Maurer said, arguing that these newer products deserve the same level of public health attention, consumer education, and access to support services as traditional betting products.

The Bigger Fight Over Prediction Markets

The exchange highlights a growing rift in how state regulators, gambling-industry watchdogs, and Kalshi itself talk about prediction markets that let users trade contracts tied to sports outcomes and other real-world events. Kalshi has maintained that its platform operates under federal oversight from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and is therefore exempt from state-level sports betting rules, a position several states — including Minnesota — are actively contesting in court. As that legal battle plays out, groups like the NCPG are being pulled into the debate simply by virtue of who funds their consumer-protection work, and Marty’s letter suggests that tension isn’t going away quietly.

Minnesota is far from alone in pushing back on Kalshi’s sports-adjacent contracts. Regulators in Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, and several other states have sent cease-and-desist letters or otherwise argued that Kalshi’s event contracts on games and matchups amount to unlicensed sports betting under existing state law. Kalshi has responded to nearly every one of those challenges with federal lawsuits, arguing that as a CFTC-registered exchange it falls outside state gambling jurisdiction entirely — a legal theory that has so far produced mixed results in the courts and left the underlying question of who actually regulates these products unresolved.

That uncertainty is exactly what makes the NCPG’s position so delicate. The organization has historically accepted funding from licensed sportsbooks and casino operators as part of its consumer-protection work, treating those partnerships as a normal part of an industry that is, at least, operating within a defined regulatory structure in the states where it’s legal. Kalshi doesn’t fit neatly into that framework, since its legal status varies depending on which state — or which court — you ask. For bettors and traders trying to make sense of where prediction markets like Kalshi fit alongside traditional sportsbooks, that patchwork of state fights and shifting legal opinions is likely to remain a defining feature of the space for the foreseeable future.

Marty’s letter doesn’t ask the NCPG to stop accepting industry funding altogether — only to draw a firmer line around who counts as a legitimate, regulated partner. Whether the organization changes course remains to be seen, but the letter adds another voice to a chorus of state officials arguing that Kalshi’s rapid growth in sports-related trading has outpaced the regulatory guardrails traditionally applied to gambling products.