CFTC Chair Selig Refuses to Pause Rulemaking Despite Solo Leadership Vacuum

Democratic lawmakers hammered CFTC Chair Michael Selig this week over his unilateral approach to regulating crypto and prediction markets while operating without the bipartisan commission structure the agency was designed to have.

The Solo Commissioner Problem

Selig has been the CFTC's lone commissioner and chair since December, steering the agency's crypto and prediction market policy while President Trump has made no public nominations to fill the remaining four seats. During Thursday's House Agriculture Committee hearing, Representative Angie Craig (D-Minnesota) pressed Selig directly: would he commit to pausing rule finalization until proper bipartisan leadership was in place?

His answer was no.

"In the interim, we cannot, for the sake of the American people, slow down in our rulemaking," Selig stated. "It's very important that we get investor protections, consumer protections and safeguards for our markets. And so, I cannot, unfortunately, commit to not do my job that I was appointed to do by the president."

The stance has drawn criticism from both sides of the aisle. Operating without a proper five-commissioner panel breaks from decades of regulatory precedent and raises questions about the legitimacy of rules that could reshape crypto trading and digital asset oversight.

Prediction Markets: Jurisdiction Battle Heats Up

The real flashpoint centers on Selig's aggressive push into prediction market regulation. The CFTC proposed rulemaking in March that could amend or create new regulations over event contracts—a move Selig claims falls under the agency's "exclusive jurisdiction." Several states disagree, and the legal chaos is mounting.

Gaming authorities in Arizona, New Jersey, New Mexico, and other states have filed lawsuits against prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket, alleging they're operating as unlicensed sports betting venues. Yet Kalshi has won court injunctions in Arizona and New Jersey this month, with judges siding with the company's argument that the CFTC holds sole regulatory authority.

Representative Gabe Vasquez (D-New Mexico) brought visual evidence to the hearing showing how prediction market bets and state-regulated gaming contracts are functionally identical—yet face completely different regulatory frameworks. "Are we regulating real economic risk, or are we allowing prediction markets to steal billions of dollars in an unregulated free-for-all, with no consumer protection as Congress and the CFTC turns a blind eye?" Vasquez asked.

Selig doubled down on the agency's rulemaking agenda when questioned by Representative Don Davis, stating: "We're going to do more through rulemaking. We can't have the staff deciding on discretion what the rules are."