Minnesota’s legislative elections could give sports betting supporters a chance to break years of stalemate in one of the few remaining states without legal sportsbooks.
- A compromise preserves tribal sportsbook control while providing financial benefits to horse tracks and charitable gaming groups.
- Sports betting supporters face opposition within both parties despite agreement among gambling interests.
- Kalshi favors DFL control of both chambers, while Polymarket also favors the party in the state Senate.
The Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL) has generally backed a tribal-controlled market, while Republicans have pushed for broader access for horse tracks, charitable gaming groups, and other organizations. An agreement among those gaming interests has eased one major obstacle, but lawmakers remain divided over legalization.
All 134 House seats and 67 Senate seats are on the Nov. 3 ballot. The Senate's DFL majority stands at 34-33. The House began the 2026 session tied 67-67, though a Republican resignation left the DFL with 67 seats to the GOP’s 66 (with one vacancy).
The result could change how easily legalization supporters assemble enough votes to advance a bill.
A larger majority for either party could give sports betting supporters more votes to work with. That would depend on which lawmakers win, however: both parties have members whose concerns extend beyond who receives a sportsbook license.
DFL favors tribal control but faces internal opposition
A stronger DFL majority would give supporters another opportunity to advance a model built around Minnesota’s 11 tribal nations.
The party’s legalization efforts have generally reserved mobile sports betting access for tribes, which could operate sportsbooks themselves or partner with national companies. That approach reflects the tribes’ longstanding opposition to expanding commercial gambling.
Disagreements among tribes, charitable gaming groups, and the state’s two horse tracks had been a major obstacle. Those interests later reached an agreement that preserved tribal exclusivity while providing financial benefits to the other groups.
But that compromise still stalled. And more DFL seats would not automatically mean more votes for sportsbooks.
DFL Sen. John Marty has been a prominent opponent of online sports betting, citing concerns about financial harm and gambling addiction. He opened the 2025 discussion with a hearing focused on those concerns and has advocated restrictions including bans on in-game wagering and push notifications.
The party’s challenge is therefore twofold: preserve support for tribal control while persuading enough lawmakers from both parties that the proposed safeguards justify authorizing another form of gambling. A larger DFL caucus could make that task easier, but its membership would matter as much as its size.
Enjoying Covers content? Add us as a preferred source on your Google account
GOP has pushed for a more expansive market
Republicans have generally favored a broader sports betting environment, including license access for Minnesota’s two horse tracks and charitable gaming organizations.
In 2022, the House advanced a tribal-controlled proposal, but a Senate committee amended it to include racetracks. The tribes opposed the change, and lawmakers adjourned without reaching an agreement.
A larger Republican majority could give GOP supporters more influence over licensing, taxes, and the distribution of sports betting proceeds. It could also provide additional votes to overcome gambling opposition within the party.
A Republican victory would not erase the political importance of tribal support. Reopening the licensing agreement could revive a dispute that the existing compromise was designed to resolve.
Republicans have also disagreed over taxation and other provisions of the proposed legislation. As within the DFL, those divisions mean supporters cannot rely on party affiliation alone to secure passage.
DFL favored to win legislative control
Prediction market traders favor the DFL to control Minnesota’s legislature after November’s elections. As of Oct. 27, Kalshi displayed an 89% probability of Democratic control of the state House and an 87% probability of Democratic control of the state Senate. Those figures represent market-implied probabilities rather than projected vote shares or seat totals.
Polymarket likewise gave Democrats an 87% chance of winning the Minnesota State Senate. Trading volume remains limited compared with national races on both platforms.
The outlook points toward another opportunity for supporters of a tribal-centered sports betting framework. In either scenario, Minnesota’s recent record gives sports betting supporters reason to welcome a more decisive election result.
With narrow margins and opponents in both parties, a handful of lawmakers could again determine whether legalization advances.
The election may change the balance of power, but legalization will still depend on whether enough lawmakers are willing to support the compromise that gambling stakeholders have already accepted.
