• by Ray Schultz , Columnist, 7 hours ago

"Guys and Dolls" fans may recall the advice given to the gambler Sky Masterson by his father: “Someday, somewhere, a guy is going to come to you and show you a nice brand-new deck of cards on which the seal is never broken, and this guy is going to offer to bet you that the jack of spades will jump out of this deck and squirt cider in your ear. But, son, do not bet him, for as sure as you do you are going to get an ear full of cider.”  

The moral is that gamblers are fools, especially those who bet on certain propositions.  

What brings this to mind is the case filed by Arizona against Kalshi, the prediction markets firm, alleging that it fosters illegal election gambling. 

“Kalshi may brand itself as a ’prediction market,’ but what it’s actually doing is running an illegal gambling operation and taking bets on Arizona elections, both of which violate Arizona law,” Attorney General Kris Mayes said in a statement.

Betting on election outcomes—and any number of other matters—is a growing pastime. If you want the morning line for 2028, the oddsmakers now place J.D. Vance as the favorite to win the presidential race, followed by Gavin Newsom and President Donald Trump, although Trump is ineligible to run for a third firm.  

There will surely be other cases filed in different venues. But in the end, this will be less about the evils of gambling than how betting is marketed. 

Not much research has been done on it yet. But in 2023, a study was conducted in Australia and has been published this year, fielded by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the Society for the Study of Addiction.

“Direct marketing offers (emails, push notifications and text messages) are frequently received by people with active gambling accounts, but they can opt out,” the study notes. What the researchers hoped to find out is if opting out reduces betting and short-term harms in a gambling environment. 

The study was based on a survey of 227+ participants. Of these, 62% were men, 52% of whom scored in the moderate-risk or problem range on the Problem Gambling Severity Index. The mean age was 45. 

The results were as follows: “The opt-out group placed 23% fewer bets, spent 39% less money and reported 67% fewer short-term gambling harms compared with the controls.”

Now this study apparently focused on sports betting. It is not clear what the impact would be on political or special proposition wagering. But the suggested blame is obvious. And it is clear that people who opt out lead happier lives.