Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Arved De La Rosa, and I'm just a regular citizen from Texas writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I've used prediction markets a few times, and I believe they have real value for people like me. I want to urge the CFTC to support well-regulated prediction markets with fair rules, not bans or overly tight restrictions.
I've turned to platforms like Kalshi to get a sense of what might happen with events that affect my life, like election outcomes or economic policy changes. The information I find there often feels more reliable than what I hear from news or polls. It's not just about making a bet; it's about understanding the world better. I think it's important that everyday folks like me have the freedom to participate in these legal, regulated markets. Shutting us out would mean only big players get access to this kind of insight, and that doesn't seem right.
I'm also worried about what happens if the CFTC over-restricts or bans these markets. I've read about unregulated offshore platforms, and they don't seem safe at all. No oversight, no consumer protections. If prediction markets get pushed out of the U.S., people will still use them, just in riskier places. Regulated markets like Kalshi are a much better option, with rules to protect users. The CFTC should focus on making sure these domestic platforms work well, not driving activity overseas.
Another thing that bothers me is the idea of calling event contracts "gaming." I don't see it that way. When I trade on a prediction market, I'm putting in time to research and think about real-world events. It's not luck; it's judgment, just like investing in stocks. These contracts have real economic purposes, like helping people hedge risks or figure out likely outcomes. I hope the CFTC sees that too, especially when considering questions 15 through 22 about defining gaming versus legitimate markets.
I understand there are risks, like manipulation or insider trading. But I believe the answer is targeted regulation, not broad bans. The CFTC already has tools to go after bad actors, as noted in questions 1 through 6 on core principles. Use those tools, and create specific rules for specific problems, instead of punishing everyone by shutting down entire markets.
I'm asking the CFTC to support proportionate regulation that keeps prediction markets accessible to regular people while addressing real concerns. Don't let heavy-handed rules push this valuable tool out of reach or into unsafe corners of the internet. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Arved De La Rosa
