45 PUBLIC GAMING INTERNATIONAL • JULY/AUGUST 2026 Thinking, Amplified. An exploration of the forces shaping the games-of-chance industry. Integrating real-world observation, human judgment, and AI-assisted modeling to expand perspective, stress-test hypotheses, and examine long-term consequences. Visit PublicGaming.com to view PGRI AI Lab articles. June 27: All Markets Are NOT Local One of the most persistent and intellectually unhelpful tropes in the lottery industry is the phrase, “All markets are local.” The statement appears whenever someone cites an innovation from another jurisdiction, describes a successful regulatory framework, points to a new approach to responsible gaming, or asks what one market might learn from another. Somebody always responds: “Our market is different.” The discussion ends. The lesson is dismissed. The opportunity to learn disappears. Of course markets are different. Nobody needs to be reminded that Finland is not Florida, that Switzerland is not Texas, or that Canada is not Italy. Political systems differ. Regulatory structures differ. Cultures differ. Retail environments differ. But the focus on these differences has become often blinds us to a much more important reality: the forces shaping lottery markets are becoming increasingly universal. In fact, one might reasonably argue that government lottery is among the least local industries in the world. Operators throughout the world share remarkably similar missions, face remarkably similar challenges, and increasingly confront remarkably similar competitive pressures. Yet the industry sometimes behaves as though every market exists on its own island, disconnected from the experiences of everyone else. July 1: How Regulatory Changes Reflect Competing Theories of Governance The evolution of gambling regulation is often described as though it were simply a matter of responding to technology, consumer demand, the need to fight illegal operators, or market forces like the growth of online consumer activity. The implication is that governments are merely adapting to forces beyond their control. But that interpretation misses something fundamental. Gambling regulation is not merely a construct of technical requirements. It reflects a theory of governance imbued with values, priorities, and assumptions about the proper role of government. Every licensing decision, tax structure, enforcement mechanism, responsible gaming standard, and market-access policy reflects choices about what governments believe they owe their citizens, how gambling should serve society, and where the balance should lie between commercial freedom and the public interest. Seen through that lens, the evolution of gambling regulation over the past fifteen years is not simply a story about gambling. It is a story about competing philosophies of governance. One philosophy begins with the premise that gambling is not like other consumer products, and so should not be treated as such. July 11: The Doors Are Closing on the "Prediction Markets Are Not Gambling" Charade For the past two years, prediction market operators have built their rapid expansion around one central proposition: they are not offering gambling products. They are offering financial instruments. That distinction has been the foundation upon which companies such as Kalshi and Polymarket have attempted to construct an entirely new regulatory framework. If sportsevent contracts are financial derivatives rather than sports wagers, they argue, then they belong under federal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), not under the gambling laws that states have spent decades developing. It has been an ingenious legal strategy. It has also become increasingly difficult to sustain. The past several months have produced a remarkable convergence of events suggesting that regulators, courts, policymakers, financial institutions, and even portions of the financial community are beginning to view the issue through a very different lens. July 19: U.S. States Are Closing the Sweepstakes Casino Loophole For years, online sweepstakes casinos have argued that they are not gambling businesses at all. Because players technically purchase virtual currency, receive "free" sweepstakes entries, and participate through dual-currency systems, operators have maintained that their products fall outside traditional gambling laws. Regulators increasingly appear to disagree. Across the United States, legislatures, attorneys general, regulators, and courts are reaching much the same conclusion: if a product looks like a casino, feels like a casino, and functions like a casino, the legal mechanism used to deliver it should not determine whether it is regulated as gambling. That shift is becoming unmistakable. Indiana recently became the seventh state to prohibit dualcurrency sweepstakes casinos, with Maine soon becoming the eighth. Tennessee, Oklahoma, California, Connecticut, Louisiana, Montana, New Jersey, New York and other jurisdictions have either enacted prohibitions, strengthened enforcement authority, or expanded investigations targeting sweepstakes operators. Continued on PublicGamimg.com where you can read the entire articles and other PGRI AI Lab articles.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTg4MTM=