Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Jeff Chappell, and I'm just a regular guy from Utah who wants 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 for a while now, and I believe these markets are valuable and deserve fair, balanced regulation rather than heavy-handed restrictions.
I rely on prediction markets for information that I can't get anywhere else. Honestly, their forecasts on elections and big public events have been way more accurate than anything I see from polls or talking heads on TV. That kind of insight helps me make better decisions, whether it's understanding political shifts or planning around economic changes. And it's not just for me; that accuracy benefits everyone, even people who don't trade. Beyond that, these markets let me hedge real risks. For example, I've used them to offset uncertainties around policies that could hit my personal finances, like tax changes tied to election outcomes. It's practical, not some game.
I also value the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets like Kalshi. Having these platforms under CFTC oversight makes me feel safer as a consumer. If we over-restrict or ban these markets, people like me will just turn to offshore alternatives with no protections. That's a worse outcome. Regulation should keep us safe, not push us into sketchy corners of the internet. Plus, I don't see event contracts as gambling. They serve real purposes, like hedging and discovering accurate prices through informed trading. Calling this "gaming" feels like a stretch; it takes research and judgment, just like any other investment. Informed traders actually make the market better by sharpening those prices, which helps everyone involved.
I'd like to address a couple of specific questions from the ANPR. On Question 7, about balancing innovation and consumer protection, I think regulated markets already strike that balance by giving regular folks access while having rules to prevent abuse. And on Question 15, regarding defining gaming versus legitimate markets, I strongly feel event contracts aren't gaming when they're tied to real-world outcomes and economic needs. They're tools, not slot machines.
I'm asking you to support proportionate regulation for prediction markets. Don't ban or over-restrict them. Focus on targeted rules to handle specific risks like manipulation, which you're already equipped to tackle. These markets are useful, safe when regulated, and worth preserving for people like me who rely on them. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Jeff Chappell
