Is Online Sports Betting in Wisconsin Supported by the Voting Public?
Posted on: March 3, 2026, 11:33h.
Last updated on: March 3, 2026, 11:33h.
- Legislation in Wisconsin would give tribes exclusive control of online sports betting
- Commercial sportsbooks say they aren’t interested in facilitating tribal sports betting because 60% of the revenue would need to stay with the compacted tribe
State lawmakers in Wisconsin continue to consider expanding tribal sports betting to the internet.
Last month, Assembly Bill 601 cleared the Wisconsin State Assembly on a voice vote.
A carryover from 2025, the legislation would hand the Badger State’s federally recognized gaming tribes the exclusive privilege to take sports bets online. A condition of the bill is that a tribe’s sportsbook computer server must remain on sovereign land through the so-called “hub-and-spoke” model.
The Marquette University Law School Poll reports that the voting public opposes online sports betting. A survey found that 64% of likely voters oppose the legalization of online sportsbooks. Only 34% said they were in favor.
Mobile sports betting opposition is bipartisan, with 66% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans resistant. More than seven in 10 who attend weekly religious services voiced opposition.
Commercial Sportsbooks Opposed
AB601 would grant Wisconsin’s 11 compacted tribes, which operate 25 casinos, to take sports bets online. The legislation would require that online sportsbooks share a to-be-determined cut of the gross betting proceeds with the state.
Federal courts have ruled that the hub-and-spoke online sports betting model constitutes tribal gaming, as defined by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. But a condition of the federal gaming law mandating that “not less than 60% of the net revenues is income to the Indian tribe” has rendered Wisconsin’s possible online sports betting market unattractive for commercial operators like FanDuel and DraftKings.
The Sports Betting Alliance, whose members include FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, Fanatics, and bet365, says Wisconsin lawmakers failed to be transparent in passing AB601 through a voice vote.
The people of Wisconsin, unfortunately, don’t have the benefit of knowing how their elected representatives voted,” SBA President Joe Maloney said.
Maloney labeled the process as “backroom dealing” that bypassed the people’s ability to weigh in. The SBA thinks Wisconsin should consider amending the state constitution to permit commercial online sports betting through a statewide ballot referendum, which could still involve the tribes. Without sportsbook leaders like DraftKings and FanDuel, Maloney says Wisconsin’s online sports betting consumers would be underserved and therefore unattracted to the regulated marketplace.
“When we’re driving more competitors into the marketplace, we’re just delivering a better product for the consumer, and that’s delivering more back to the state, as opposed to monopoly or duopoly operations that won’t have the opportunity,” Maloney said.
Wisconsin Senate Odds
There is presumably an appetite in the State Legislature’s upper chamber.
Last fall, the Wisconsin Senate advanced Senate Bill 592, the counterpart to AB601. However, the bill was never put up for a vote on the full Senate floor. SB592 remains supported by 20 Senators in the 33-member chamber.
AB601 remains awaiting a Senate committee assignment, a task handled by the Wisconsin Committee on Senate Organization.
No comments yet