Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Jose Nieto, and I'm a regular citizen from California writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I'm new to prediction markets, but I've been following their growth with interest, and I strongly support their development under fair and sensible regulation. I believe these markets offer unique benefits to people like me, and I want to urge the CFTC to craft rules that allow them to thrive without over-restricting access.
As someone who keeps up with elections and public events, I see prediction markets as a powerful tool for getting accurate forecasts. Polls and pundits often miss the mark, but these markets seem to cut through the noise by aggregating what people really think, based on where they put their money. That kind of information isn't just helpful for traders; it's valuable for everyone trying to understand what's likely to happen. Beyond forecasting, I also see the potential for hedging personal financial risks. For instance, if an election outcome could impact taxes or policies that affect my job or savings, having a way to offset that uncertainty would be a real lifeline. It's not gambling, it's planning.
I'm also a firm believer in the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. Platforms like Kalshi, which operate under CFTC oversight, are far safer than unregulated offshore sites. If we clamp down too hard, people will just go to those less secure places, and that's worse for everyone. Regulation should protect us, not push activity into the shadows. Plus, I think informed trading actually helps. When people with good insights trade, it makes the prices more accurate, and that benefits all participants, not just the traders themselves.
I want to address a couple of specific questions from the ANPR. On Question 7, about balancing innovation and consumer protection, I think the CFTC should focus on clear rules for transparency and fairness rather than broad bans. And on Question 29, regarding inside information, I believe informed traders often improve price discovery. The CFTC already has tools to tackle manipulation or insider trading, so let's use those instead of limiting the whole market.
I understand there are concerns about manipulation or misuse, and those shouldn't be ignored. But banning or over-restricting prediction markets punishes regular folks like me who just want a fair shot at using these tools. The answer is targeted oversight, not shutting things down. I respectfully ask the CFTC to support proportionate regulation that allows prediction markets to grow while addressing specific risks. Let's keep innovation alive and accessible here in the U.S.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Jose Nieto
