Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Jay Albertson, and I'm just an everyday citizen from Oklahoma. I'm writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I strongly support well-regulated prediction markets, and I hope my perspective as someone who uses these platforms can help inform your approach.
My family has investments in precious metals, and we rely on prediction markets to manage risks tied to price swings and economic events. I personally use Kalshi, a regulated platform, to trade on commodities and hedge against uncertainties that could impact our financial stability. This isn't a game or a gamble for us. It's a practical tool, much like any other investment strategy. I research market trends and economic data before making trades, using the same kind of judgment I would for stocks or other assets. Classifying event contracts as "gaming," as some have suggested, feels wrong to me. They serve a real economic purpose, helping folks like me protect against risks we face in our daily lives.
I also value the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. Platforms like Kalshi are transparent and overseen by the CFTC, which gives me confidence as a user. Banning or over-restricting these markets would likely push activity to unregulated offshore platforms, which are far less safe. I've seen what happens when people turn to sketchy, overseas sites. There's no accountability, and users get burned. Keeping prediction markets regulated in the U.S. protects people like me and ensures the system stays fair.
On some of the specific questions in your ANPR, I'd like to address a couple that hit close to home. Regarding Question 7 on balancing innovation and consumer protection, I believe regulated markets already strike that balance. The CFTC has strong tools to prevent manipulation and insider trading, and I've seen how Kalshi enforces rules to keep things above board. There's no need for heavy-handed bans when these safeguards are already in place. And for Question 29 about informed trading, I think it actually helps. When knowledgeable traders participate, the prices on these markets get sharper and more accurate. That benefits everyone, not just the traders, by providing better information to the public.
I'm not saying there aren't risks. I know some worry about manipulation or bad actors. But the answer isn't to shut down prediction markets. It's to enforce the rules you already have and focus on specific problems rather than broad prohibitions. Shutting these markets down would hurt regular people like me who use them responsibly to manage real financial risks.
I urge you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Keep them legal and accessible under fair oversight, and don't let over-restrictions push activity offshore. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Jay Albertson
