Reporting from Madison.

I'm Murv Seymour for here and Now.

>> Prediction betting markets draw billions in wagers on everything from World Cup outcomes to now elections.

Kalshi, which describes itself as the next generation financial exchange, this month launched a midterms hub designed, they say, as the one stop shop for state and federal election forecasting and betting.

Not so fast, says the Wisconsin Elections Commission.

Commissioner Ann Jacobs is here, and thanks for being here.

>> Happy to be here.

>> So the commission recently put out some guidance to voters about betting on the outcomes of elections.

What did that say?

>> The guidance we sent out to voters basically summarized what has been Wisconsin law since about 1849, which is you cannot bet on an election and vote in that election.

>> So what are the penalties for putting a wager on an election?

>> There's two sort of penalties for it.

Number one is someone could challenge your ballot and have it not count.

And the second one, which is far more draconian, is it is actually a class I felony to bet and vote in the same election.

>> How would anyone find out whether you had done that or not?

>> I get asked that question quite a bit, and the answer is the same way crimes are reported to authorities, of all types a, a spurned spouse or boyfriend girlfriend, a disgruntled employee, an agitated neighbor, someone who you promised to share the money with and then didn't share the bet results with.

That's how these sort of things are reported.

>> How could betting on the outcome warp the process, even tip the outcome?

>> There's a few ways it could.

I mean, one of which is sort of on the very personal level, you are no longer voting for the person you think would be best in the position you're now voting for someone who can line your pockets.

And that's a corruption of, of the process on a very individual level.

In theory, you could have people within a, a campaign go out to place bets to try to tilt the prediction markets to create, a false sense of momentum or antipathy towards a given candidate.

So it could be an attempt to manipulate it at a much larger level.

>> What about the argument that wagering on an election actually gets people who wouldn't ordinarily be interested in voting involved in the process?

>> I find that so odd.

We want them to come into the process to vote, not for the person that they think is going to be best, but to try to make money.

That's sort of a warped view of elections.

We want people to vote.

I want people to vote.

I hope everyone goes out and votes on August 11th, but I want you to go out and vote because you believe that is going to be the best person for the job at hand.

>> What is your reaction to Kalshi new midterms hub?

>> I, you know, apparently there is great enthusiasm for this, as I accidentally learned by posting on social media about this law and people take it quite seriously.

I don't have any opinion one way or another about prediction markets, whether they're good or bad, legal or not.

All I care about is I don't want people to accidentally commit a felony by voting and betting.

You can vote.

You can bet you just can't do both.

>> Does this put the Wisconsin Elections Commission squarely into a fight with a very, very moneyed interest?

>> I hope not, because we're one of something like 35 states that have this same law.

The policy behind the law is sound and has been that case for 100 and however many years it's been.

So we really need to think about whether or not we want our elections to be governed by money making or by efficacy in government.

>> On another matter, what is your reaction to this week's court ruling that upholds WECA guidance that you opposed, saying early absentee voters can't get a do over even if their candidate dropped out?

Now, that's with nearly 130,000 early ballots cast and another candidate this week dropping out.

>> I was obviously very disappointed in the outcome.

I have been on the commission since 2016.

It was our guidance, at all times until a court put it on hold.

And now we've issued this new guidance for the very first time without alerting voters.

It was coming.

And I was very disappointed in that outcome.

>> All right.

We leave it