Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Jonah Parsons, and I'm a student from West Virginia writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I've had a bit of personal experience with prediction markets, having used them a few times, and I strongly support the idea of regulating them properly instead of restricting or banning them outright.
As a student, I value the chance to participate in legal, regulated markets. Prediction markets aren't just a niche interest for me; they're a way to engage with real-world events and learn about economics and decision-making in a hands-on way. I've used platforms to make small trades on things like election outcomes, and it's been eye-opening to see how these markets aggregate information. The prices often seem to reflect what's likely to happen better than polls or news commentary. That kind of insight shouldn't be locked away from regular people like me. I believe allowing everyday citizens to take part makes the system fairer and the predictions stronger.
What worries me most is the idea that heavy restrictions or bans could push activity to unregulated offshore platforms. I've read about how some of these markets operate outside the US with no oversight, and that seems far riskier than trading on a regulated platform like Kalshi, which operates under CFTC rules. If people like me can't access safe, legal markets, we'll either be shut out completely or tempted to use sketchy alternatives with no protections. Regulation done right keeps us safe and keeps the markets transparent. I think the CFTC already has tools to handle issues like manipulation or insider trading, and those should be enforced rather than creating broad prohibitions that hurt legitimate users.
Specifically, in response to some of the questions in the ANPR, I think Question 7 about balancing innovation and consumer protection is key. I'm all for protecting consumers, but banning or over-restricting prediction markets doesn't protect anyone if it just drives activity underground. Also, regarding Question 15 on defining legitimate markets versus gaming, I don't see prediction markets as gambling. They require research and judgment, much like any other investment.
I urge you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Focus on targeted rules to address specific risks without shutting down the whole space. These markets are valuable for learning, engagement, and even hedging against uncertainty, and regular folks like me should have access to them in a safe, regulated way. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Jonah Parsons
