Wisconsin Lawmakers Delay Online Sports Betting Vote to 2026

A proposal to legalise online sports betting in Wisconsin through a tribal “hub-and-spoke” model was removed from the Assembly floor agenda on Wednesday, pushing action on the measure into next year’s full legislative session.

Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August confirmed the decision at a morning press conference, saying the chamber would have approved Assembly Bill 601 had it come to a vote. He said lawmakers raised new concerns over the weekend, prompting the delay. The Senate is not scheduled to reconvene before January. “There’s really no rush on this,” August said, adding that he expects a vote early in 2026. He has urged lawmakers to support the bill as a way to keep betting revenue in Wisconsin, pointing to emerging prediction markets across the U.S.

Aspect	Current Status	Next Steps	Key Stakeholders
Online Sports Betting	Bill pulled from Assembly floor	Vote expected in January 2026 session	Wisconsin tribes, national sportsbooks, legislators
Tribal “Hub-and-Spoke” Model	Proposed system for online betting	Requires compact renegotiation & federal approval	11 Wisconsin tribes, Potawatomi Casinos & Hotels
Industry Opposition	Sports Betting Alliance disagrees with framework	Ongoing lobbying and discussions	DraftKings, FanDuel, SBA members
Prediction Markets	Emerging alternative regulated federally	Potential legal and tribal challenges	National sportsbooks, regulators, Ho-Chunk Nation

Tribal-Backed Proposal Faces Industry Pushback

During a closed caucus on Wednesday, Dominic Ortiz, CEO of Potawatomi Casinos & Hotels, said on The New Normal podcast that the Assembly will revisit the issue in January. Ortiz said the bill “creates a fair playing field and unites the tribes,” contrasting the tribal framework with competing proposals from the Sports Betting Alliance (SBA), a coalition of national sportsbook operators.

“We’re about partnership, not ownership,” Ortiz said. “The clear indication from the SBA is if they can’t have their rules, they’re going to come in and burn down the market.” The SBA supports expanding sports betting in the state but opposes the current terms. A representative told lawmakers that under the proposed structure, operators would be required to send 60% of revenue to tribal partners. The group pointed instead to Michigan’s tribal-commercial model as a more balanced approach.

Wisconsin already permits in-person sports betting under 2021 amendments to tribal gaming compacts approved by Governor Tony Evers. He said this week that maintaining tribal control over sports betting remains “the ultimate goal.”

The new proposal would extend that authority into the online market. It would allow the state’s 11 federally recognised tribes to partner with sportsbook operators, provided the servers that process wagers remain on tribal land. A similar system underpins the Seminole Tribe’s mobile sports betting operations in Florida. The bill would require tribes to renegotiate their compacts with the state and secure approval from the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs. Ortiz said the Milwaukee Brewers and Milwaukee Bucks support the proposal, noting that expanded betting revenue could help offset inflation and rising operating costs. The Potawatomi have longstanding sponsorship ties with both teams.

 

Prediction Markets Add Pressure

Lawmakers began formal hearings on sports betting expansion earlier this month. Supporters, including Senator Howard Marklein, argued that legalisation would regulate activity already occurring illegally. Others raised concerns about increasing access to gambling.

Ortiz has pointed to the rise of prediction markets—a type of wagering regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission—as an additional factor. Major operators such as DraftKings and FanDuel have signaled plans to launch their own prediction markets, which may operate nationally even where sports betting is not legal.

“There are clear indications they can and will operate prediction markets where sports betting is not legal,” Ortiz said. “Their clear intent is to have ownership of Wisconsin. They’re not here to be our partner.” Several states and tribal nations, including Wisconsin’s Ho-Chunk Nation, are challenging prediction markets in court, arguing they violate state gambling laws and the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Regulators have also warned sportsbooks that offering prediction markets could jeopardize their licenses.

 

We’re about partnership, not ownership. The clear indication from the SBA is if they can’t have their rules, they’re going to come in and burn down the market.

 

What Comes Next

With the vote delayed, the proposal will re-enter debate when the Legislature convenes for its next full session in early 2026. Supporters say the pause gives lawmakers time to refine the framework and address internal concerns. Opponents and industry groups are expected to continue lobbying for alternative models.

If approved, Wisconsin would join a small number of states with online sports betting systems built around tribal control—an approach that could shape negotiations with national operators and test legal boundaries around prediction markets in the coming years.