Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Kortez Hollins, and I'm a trader and investor from Texas. I'm writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I've been actively trading on platforms like Kalshi, and I strongly support the idea of well-regulated prediction markets. They're not just a tool for me personally, but I believe they offer real value to society as a whole.
I got into prediction markets because I saw how often polls and pundits get things wrong, especially on elections and big public events. The forecasts on these platforms have consistently been more accurate, and that helps me make better decisions, whether it's about my investments or just understanding what's likely to happen. Beyond that, I use these markets to hedge personal financial risks. For example, I was able to offset some unexpected costs when my car broke down last year by trading on event contracts tied to economic indicators. That kind of practical help is something I couldn't get from traditional investments alone.
I'm all for consumer protection, but I think the answer is regulation, not restriction. Platforms like Kalshi, which operate under CFTC oversight, are far safer than unregulated offshore alternatives. If we ban or over-restrict these markets, people like me will just go elsewhere, to places with no rules or accountability. The US should be leading in financial innovation, not pushing it away to other countries. Plus, the CFTC already has strong tools to handle issues like manipulation and insider trading. Use those, don't shut down the whole market.
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 trading stocks or commodities. They serve real economic purposes, like hedging risks and discovering prices. Informed trading actually makes the data better for everyone, and academic research backs this up. I'm no professor, but I've read enough to know the data shows these markets improve information for public decision-making.
Looking at some of your specific questions, like in Topic B on public interest (Questions 7-14), I think the balance should favor innovation while protecting consumers through targeted rules. On Topic C (Questions 15-22), classifying these contracts as gaming would be a mistake; theyre legitimate tools for risk management. And for Topic E on inside information (Questions 29-32), I believe informed traders help price discovery, and existing laws already cover insider trading abuses.
I urge you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Don't ban or over-restrict them. Focus on specific risks with targeted rules, and keep the US at the forefront of financial innovation. Thanks for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Kortez Hollins
