Font Size: AAA // Print // Bookmark

Comment for Proposed Rule 91 FR 12516

  • From: Rose Russo
    Organization(s):

    Comment No: 116329
    Date: 4/30/2026

    Comment Text:

    Dear Chairman and Commissioners,


    My name is Rose Russo, and I'm a regular citizen from New York writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I'm not an expert or a big investor, just someone who believes in having the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. I've recently learned about prediction markets, and while I'm new to them, I strongly support their existence under fair oversight by the CFTC.


    I think prediction markets are valuable because they let everyday people like me have a say in things that affect our lives, whether it's an election, economic policy, or other big events. The idea that I could use a platform to express my views or even protect myself financially from uncertainty is exciting. But what really matters to me is knowing that these markets are safe and above board. I've read about platforms like Kalshi, which operate under CFTC rules, and that gives me confidence. Compare that to unregulated offshore sites where there's no accountability, no protection if something goes wrong. I'd much rather see the CFTC regulate these markets properly so people like me aren't pushed into risky, shady corners of the internet. Banning or over-restricting prediction markets won't stop them; it'll just drive activity to places where no one is watching.


    I'm also aware of concerns, like the potential for manipulation or insider trading. I get that those are real issues, but I don't think the answer is to shut down the whole idea. The CFTC already has laws and tools to go after bad actors in other markets, and I believe those can work here too. Why punish everyone for the actions of a few? In response to some of your questions, like those in Topic Area B about public interest (Questions 7-14), I think the balance should lean toward innovation with strong safeguards, not outright bans. And for Topic Area D on procedures (Questions 23-28), I'd urge you to look at markets individually rather than making blanket rules that could exclude legitimate platforms.


    I'm not here to pretend I have all the answers, but I do know that as a New Yorker and an everyday person, I want the chance to participate in safe, regulated spaces. Please support proportionate regulation of prediction markets that keeps them accessible to regular folks while addressing risks with the tools you already have. Don't let heavy-handed restrictions push people like me toward unsafe alternatives.


    Thank you for considering my perspective.


    Sincerely,

    Rose Russo

Edit
No records to display.