Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is James Faust, and I'm just a regular citizen from Texas writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I've been trading on platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket for a while now, and I strongly support well-regulated prediction markets. I believe they provide real value to people like me and to society as a whole, and I hope my perspective can help shape your approach.
I first got into prediction markets because I wanted a clearer picture of what might happen with events that affect my life, like elections or economic decisions. I've found that the forecasts on these platforms are often way more accurate than what I hear from polls or TV pundits. For example, last year, while everyone on the news was guessing about a certain election outcome, the market I was following on Kalshi had a much sharper read on the actual result weeks ahead of time. That kind of insight isn't just helpful for traders; it's valuable for anyone trying to make sense of the world. If regular folks like me can access this information, it levels the playing field instead of keeping all the good data with big institutions.
I also want to push back on the idea that event contracts are gambling. They're not. Trading on these markets takes research and judgment, just like investing in stocks or commodities. I'm not rolling dice; I'm reading up on issues, weighing probabilities, and making informed decisions. To me, that's an economic activity with a real purpose, not a game of chance. Plus, I've used these markets to hedge risks that matter to me, like potential policy changes that could impact my taxes or costs down here in Texas. It's practical, not frivolous.
I know there are concerns about things like insider trading or manipulation, and I get that. But those are already illegal under existing laws, and the CFTC has the power to crack down on bad actors without banning entire markets. Shutting down prediction markets to stop a few cheaters would be like closing the stock market over insider trading scandals. It punishes the rest of us who are playing by the rules. Specifically, regarding Questions 7 and 15 from your ANPR, I believe the public interest is served by keeping these markets accessible with strong oversight, and event contracts should be defined by their economic utility, not lumped in with gaming.
I urge you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Don't over-restrict or ban them. Keep them open for everyday people like me to participate in a fair, transparent way under your supervision. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
James Faust
