Delaware County Expands Poll Worker Oath to Ban Prediction Market Bets
A board of elections in Delaware County, in the Philadelphia suburbs, approved a resolution that tightens the oath taken by poll workers by explicitly prohibiting participation in prediction markets tied to elections. The move comes amid concerns that such markets could influence, or be perceived to influence, election outcomes.
Elections officials, including Delaware County elections director Jim Allen, argued that prediction markets are a troubling development because they could create a financial stake in elections and undermine public trust. “The last thing we need is the referee in elections being accused of having a financial stake in these so-called prediction markets,” Allen said.
What are prediction markets? These platforms let people buy and sell contracts based on the probability of a future event, including political outcomes. Examples in the United States include Kalshi, which hosts a section on elections and lets users wager on topics like who will win a state race or which party will gain control of a legislative chamber, and Polymarket, which lists hundreds of events related to elections, including primary results.
Pennsylvania law already bars poll workers from directly or indirectly betting on elections. The county’s resolution, however, goes further by adding prediction markets to the oath itself. Legal experts note that this county-level change does not carry the same weight as state law, and there’s been no Pennsylvania ruling testing whether prediction markets violate existing election-betting bans.
Across Pennsylvania, a non-comprehensive review found no other counties with a similar ban specifically addressing prediction markets for poll workers. The Pennsylvania Department of State did not respond to inquiries about whether its staff are prohibited from using such markets. Jennifer Morrell, CEO of The Elections Group, said she wasn’t aware of other jurisdictions taking this exact step. She did point to Maryland, where gambling on elections is illegal statewide; a state board of elections there recently suggested that using prediction markets for election wagers would at best violate state law and could potentially carry penalties.
Morrell added that prediction markets risk creating incentives to influence outcomes rather than simply predicting them, a concern she says could harm democracy. “If we commodify votes, turning them into a financial instrument, the framing shifts from who should lead to who will win, and that’s a very different question,” she warned.
Legislative responses have been proposed but not yet introduced. State Rep. Danilo Burgos, a Democrat from Philadelphia, has suggested measures to regulate prediction markets, while State Sen. Lindsey Williams, a Democrat from Allegheny County, has floated bills addressing the possibility that public officials could profit from non-public information via these platforms. None has been formally filed.
Allen emphasized that while rules could evolve, elections continue and public trust must be safeguarded. “We have the Wild West out there on this front, and we need to do something to prevent it from seeping into the election process,” he said.
Carter Walker, a reporter for Votebeat in partnership with Spotlight PA, contributed to this report. You can reach Carter at cwalker@votebeat.org.