Oregon Senators Ask CFTC to Ban Wildfire Betting — Citing Arson Risk and the $1.2 Million Wagered on the LA Fires

Oregon's senators, together with a broader public coalition, have written formally to CFTC Chair Michael Selig demanding that the commission prohibit designated contract markets from offering event contracts on active wildfires. The demand follows CNN reporting that Polymarket accepted more than $1.2 million in wagers on the Palisades and Eaton fires — the January 2025 Los Angeles wildfires that killed 31 people and destroyed more than 16,000 structures. 'Offering bets on destructive wildfires threatens to minimize communities' suffering all so the rich and powerful can profit,' the senators wrote, adding that state and local fire officials had warned of a direct arson risk: individuals could be 'tempted to commit arson in order to make sure their bets are successful.' The CFTC has been asked to respond to four specific questions by August 14.

For UK readers, the arson argument is the most structurally unusual aspect of this controversy. The UK Gambling Commission has long regulated what categories of events can be bet on — political bets on outcomes the bettor could influence (a candidate betting on their own election result, for instance) are prohibited under existing guidance. The wildfire case presents the same logic applied to a physical act: a person holding a financial position on a wildfire spreading more than a specified number of acres has a direct financial incentive to ensure that outcome occurs, and unlike manipulating a clinical trial, starting or spreading a fire requires no specialized knowledge or institutional access. Fire officials — not just legislators — have raised this concern, which gives it more weight than a purely political objection.

The letter also targets a new platform — separate from Kalshi and Polymarket — that explicitly markets contracts on California wildfires with the slogan 'You can't predict fire, but you can trade on it.' The emergence of disaster-specific operators suggests the CFTC's decision on wildfire contracts will set a precedent for an expanding ecosystem of platforms, not just for the established licensed exchanges. Oregon is in the middle of its own active fire season — the Bench fire in Warm Springs was burning as recently as July 25 — which gives the senators' letter immediate local context rather than a purely theoretical framing.

The wildfire and clinical trial controversies (both active in the same week) represent a distinct category of challenge from the state gambling law disputes that have dominated prediction market news in 2026. The eleven-state litigation battle is about regulatory jurisdiction — who has the authority to govern these products. The wildfire and clinical trial debates are about whether specific market categories should exist at all, regardless of who regulates them. That is a harder question for prediction market platforms to answer by pointing to their CFTC licences. The commission's four-question August 14 deadline arrives while it is simultaneously processing 45 days of public comments on its proposed NPRM (comment window closed July 27) and fighting court battles in eleven states. The CFTC's answer — or failure to answer — on wildfire contracts will likely inform how it handles the clinical trial question, and both will inform the legislative proposals building in Congress following the House Agriculture Committee hearing on July 22.

Operators mentioned in this article

Crypto / On-chain

Polymarket

USDC-settled on Polygon. Largest prediction market by volume.

Recent updates