The sports betting industry isn’t just placing bets on games anymore — it’s placing some very expensive bets on American politics. DraftKings, FanDuel, Fanatics, and Bet365, all members of the recently formed Sports Betting Alliance (SBA), have collectively funneled $48 million into Win for America, a sports betting super PAC laser-focused on state and local elections. And they’re just getting started.
Inside the $48 Million Sports Betting Super PAC
Win for America has already burned through $20 million on primary races across the country, with the bulk of that spending directed at state legislative contests in Illinois and Ohio. The strategy is deliberate: rather than dumping cash into high-profile federal races, the sports betting super PAC funnels money into smaller local PACs where a few million dollars can swing outcomes.
Think about it this way — a competitive state House race might cost $500,000 total. Drop $2 million into that race through a well-funded PAC, and you’re not just influencing the outcome — you’re dominating it. That’s the playbook, and it’s ruthlessly effective.
The SBA members aren’t shy about what they want: friendlier tax rates, faster legalization timelines, and regulatory frameworks that favor large commercial operators over tribal or state-run alternatives.
Why State Races Matter More Than Congress
Here’s the thing most people miss about sports betting regulation in America: it’s almost entirely a state-level game. Congress has shown little appetite for comprehensive federal sports betting legislation since the Supreme Court struck down PASPA in 2018. That means every new market, every tax rate, every licensing decision happens in state capitals — not Washington.
Win for America understands this, which is why it has zero plans to spend on federal campaigns. Every dollar goes toward state and local races where sports betting policy is actually made. It’s a smarter use of political capital than anything the industry has tried before.
The states they’re targeting aren’t random either. Illinois recently hiked its sports betting tax rate, and operators are fighting to roll that back. Ohio is still refining its regulatory framework. Both represent markets where the rules of the game are still being written — and the SBA wants to make sure it’s holding the pen.
The Political Spending Arms Race
This $48 million war chest makes the Sports Betting Alliance one of the biggest political spenders in the state-level arena. To put it in context, that’s more than many industry trade groups spend across an entire election cycle. And this sports betting super PAC is just one piece of the puzzle — DraftKings and FanDuel also maintain their own corporate PACs and lobbying operations.
OpenSecrets data shows that FanDuel and DraftKings have been steadily ramping up their federal lobbying spending as well, hedging their bets in case Congress does eventually take action on sports betting policy.
The sports betting super PAC spending trajectory looks a lot like the casino industry’s playbook from the 1990s and 2000s — spend big early to shape regulations in your favor, then lock in those advantages before the political landscape shifts.
What the Critics Are Saying
Not everyone is thrilled about gambling companies dumping tens of millions into political campaigns. Consumer advocacy groups and some public health researchers have raised concerns about the influence of gambling money on policymakers who are supposed to be regulating the industry.
There’s an inherent tension here: the same companies that benefit from looser regulations and lower tax rates are funding the campaigns of the politicians who set those rules. It’s legal, of course — thanks to Citizens United, super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts. But the optics aren’t great, especially at a time when new research links legal sports betting to financial strain among bettors.
The counter-argument from the industry is straightforward: regulated markets are better than unregulated ones, and political engagement is how you build sustainable regulated markets. There’s truth to that. But $48 million buys a lot of influence, and the public deserves to know who’s writing the checks.
What Comes Next
With 2026 midterm primaries heating up across the country, expect Win for America’s spending to accelerate. The super PAC has already identified target races in at least a dozen states, and its total spend could easily double by November.
For the sports betting industry, this is the cost of doing business in a fragmented regulatory environment. Every state is a new battle, every election cycle brings new risks, and the companies that invest most heavily in the political process tend to come out ahead.
The question voters in these states should be asking is simple: when a sports betting company spends millions to elect your state representative, whose interests does that representative serve? The answer, like most things in American gambling politics, is complicated.
