Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Nick Beasley, and I'm just an everyday citizen from Tennessee writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I'm new to prediction markets, but I've taken the time to learn about them, and I strongly support their development under fair and balanced regulation by the CFTC.
I believe prediction markets are valuable for a few key reasons. First, they seem to produce forecasts about elections and other public events that are often more accurate than polls or pundits. I've seen how wrong the so-called experts can be, and having a system where regular folks like me can contribute to a collective prediction feels powerful. Its not just for traders; better information helps everyone make decisions, whether you're a voter or a small business owner like some of my neighbors who worry about policy changes. Second, these markets let people hedge real financial risks. For instance, if an election outcome could affect taxes or regulations that hit my budget, having a way to offset that uncertainty would be a practical tool. This isn't gambling to me. Its more like investing in stocks, where you do research and make informed calls about the world.
I also appreciate that regulated platforms, like Kalshi, are a safer bet than unregulated offshore sites. If the CFTC bans or over-restricts these markets, people will just go elsewhere, to places with no oversight. Thats worse for consumer protection, not better. I think the US should be a leader in this kind of financial innovation, not leave it to other countries to set the standard. Plus, from what I understand, the CFTC already has strong tools to stop manipulation and insider trading in other markets. Why not apply those here instead of creating heavy-handed restrictions?
Looking at some of the specific questions in the ANPR, Id like to weigh in on a couple. On Question 7, about balancing innovation and consumer protection, I think regulation should focus on transparency and enforcement of existing laws, not outright bans. And on Question 15, about defining gaming versus legitimate markets, I dont see event contracts as gambling. They serve real purposes, like hedging and price discovery, which are economic, not just entertainment.
Im asking you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Dont ban them or make the rules so tight that only big players can participate. Let regular people like me have access to these tools, under a framework that keeps things fair and safe. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Nick Beasley
