Poll finds 64% of Wisconsin voters oppose legalizing online sports betting
Around 64% of Wisconsin voters oppose legalizing online sports betting in the state, according to The Centre Square.
A recent poll from Marquette University found that of the 818 registered voters asked, 64% opposed legalizing online sports betting, while 34% supported it.
Data showed that 61% of Republicans were opposed, along with 66% of Democrats and 74% of independents.
The results also show that 71% of people who attended religious services at least once a week and 62% of those who attended less often opposed legalization.
The legislature’s November Assembly vote was delayed, with Senator Chris Kapenga writing in a newsletter that legislative offices in the state “got slammed with emails urging opposition” in the days leading up to the vote.
The bill did pass on the Assembly’s last business in February.
“Besides the dangers of gambling addiction and its social costs, I’m not a fan of funneling more money to one party that holds a monopoly on sports wagering in Wisconsin,” Kapenga wrote in the newsletter.
The bill goes to the Senate, where leadership has not indicated whether it will be taken up.
Abi Bray brings strong researching skills to the forefront of all of her writing, whether it’s the newest slots, industry trends or the ever changing legislation across the U.S, Asia and Australia, she maintains a keen eye for detail and a passion for reporting.
Verticals:
Sectors:
Topics:
Dig Deeper
Related stories
The Backstory
Why this poll lands at a pivotal moment
Public resistance to online sports betting in Wisconsin surfaces as lawmakers and tribal leaders move to redefine what counts as a legal wager. The new Marquette poll lands after the Assembly advanced a proposal to let the state’s federally recognized tribes take bets statewide on mobile devices if servers sit on tribal land. That structure is designed to fit within Wisconsin’s long-standing constitutional limits on gambling and the sovereignty of its tribal gaming compacts.
Momentum built in the Assembly late in the session, but the Senate’s appetite remains unclear. The political calculus now must account for a statewide finding that most voters oppose legalization, including majorities across party lines and among frequent churchgoers. The poll also echoes a broader national split over mobile wagering’s risks and rewards, suggesting Wisconsin’s debate will hinge on consumer protection, constitutional process and who controls the market.
A quick Assembly green light, then Senate uncertainty
In a sign of pent-up demand to address a gray market, the Assembly approved an online sports betting bill on a voice vote with minimal objection and no floor debate. The measure would allow bets placed anywhere in the state so long as the servers are located on tribal lands, aligning with compact rights and a 2006 legal precedent that permits tribes to expand offerings with federal approval. Gov. Tony Evers has indicated he would sign the bill if it reaches his desk.
Despite the easy Assembly passage, Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu has said Republicans have not focused heavily on the issue, leaving the path forward uncertain. That hesitation now intersects with fresh polling that shows a clear majority of voters remain wary. Earlier, when an Assembly vote slipped from the calendar, legislators reported a flood of emails urging opposition, reflecting a pressure campaign that could resurface in the Senate.
Tribal sovereignty and the market design
For tribal nations, statewide mobile betting via servers on tribal land is not a workaround. It is the point. Tribal leaders have cast legalization as a modernization of the compact system, an economic tool to keep dollars in Native communities and a way to regulate activity already occurring offshore. At the State of the Tribes address, leaders connected gambling revenue to core services such as health care, housing and public safety, and urged lawmakers to move the bill to a vote. That case was laid out in detail as tribal leaders pressed lawmakers to authorize online sports wagering, tying expected gains to recent marquee events and partnerships.
The proposal’s legal architecture centers on redefining a “bet” to permit mobile wagers if bettors are within Wisconsin and transactions are processed on tribal servers. Supporters argue this channels existing behavior into a regulated, compacted environment under clear jurisdiction. Skeptics, including some conservative legal advocates, warn the approach could test constitutional boundaries even if it ultimately survives a court challenge. Those questions likely intensify in the Senate, where leadership has not committed to a vote.
The bill’s architect and pressure from prediction markets
Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August has been the public face of the push, repeatedly signaling confidence in passage and framing the bill as a consumer protection and sovereignty measure. Ahead of the Assembly action, he maintained the chamber had the votes, even as timing slipped on a crowded calendar. In earlier coverage, August said he was confident the bill would pass “in our house”, underscoring bipartisan support that later materialized on the floor.
August has also warned that inaction creates space for unregulated or lightly regulated competitors. As prediction markets proliferate by selling event contracts outside traditional gambling licenses, he argued those platforms will fill the void if tribes are not allowed to offer mobile betting. The message is blunt: regulate an activity that is already happening, keep jurisdiction in Wisconsin and tie revenue to tribal operations rather than to offshore books or national apps with tenuous links to state oversight.
That framing is meant to reassure wary lawmakers and voters that the plan does not expand gambling so much as relocate it from the shadows. But it also spotlights the stakes of delay. If prediction markets and offshore sites continue to grow, tribes could lose early-mover advantage and the state could forfeit leverage to impose consumer protections that bring problem-gambling tools and data transparency into the market.
Voter skepticism in context
Wisconsin’s majority opposition does not land in a vacuum. Other states have wrestled with similar splits between entertainment value and social risks. In New York, for example, a recent survey found residents nearly evenly divided between those who see online betting as a way to regulate and tax a formerly illegal activity and those who believe it heightens problem gambling, financial strain and game integrity issues. That crosscurrent was captured as New Yorkers expressed mixed views on sports gambling even as regulators advanced new licenses in adjacent gaming products.
The Wisconsin poll shows opposition across party and religious attendance lines, a coalition that can be politically potent. It also arrived after an organized email push to lawmakers and amid an election year when legislators tend to avoid votes that antagonize active constituencies. For supporters, the challenge is to convert a process-heavy case about compacts and servers into a consumer-facing argument about safety, jurisdiction and keeping dollars local. For opponents, the data offers a mandate to slow the bill, seek tighter guardrails or push for alternative approaches to curbing offshore and prediction-market growth.
What to watch next
The Senate’s posture will determine whether the Assembly’s action translates into law this session or resets the fight for next year. Watch for committee referrals, signals from Senate leadership and whether supporters line up amendments that add consumer safeguards to blunt opposition. Also watch tribal outreach, which has been central to the coalition behind the bill and could broaden beyond gaming to emphasize community investments.
If the measure stalls, prediction markets and offshore platforms are likely winners, deepening the very dynamics lawmakers say they want to regulate. If it advances, expect rapid compact updates and a sprint by tribes and partners to stand up mobile platforms before the next NFL season, translating legal theory about servers and sovereignty into an app on a phone. Either way, the poll ensures the politics of betting will be a live wire in Wisconsin, not a quiet technical fix.
