Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Orion Delarosa, and I'm just a regular citizen from Wisconsin writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I'm not an expert or a big trader, but I've recently learned about prediction markets and believe they have real value for people like me. I want to support a balanced approach to regulating them, not banning or over-restricting them.
I'm new to prediction markets, but what draws me to them is how they provide information you can't get anywhere else. I've read about academic studies showing these markets often predict election outcomes and public events better than polls or pundits. That kind of transparency and accuracy matters to someone like me who wants to understand what's really going on, whether it's a national election or a policy change that could affect my life. Plus, I see them as a tool for hedging personal risks. If an election result or new regulation could impact my taxes or job, having a way to offset that uncertainty feels practical, not speculative.
I also believe event contracts aren't gambling. They serve a real purpose, like helping people manage financial risks or contributing to better forecasting. Classifying them as "gaming," as discussed in Questions 15-22 of the ANPR, ignores how they work like other investments. It takes research and judgment to trade on these platforms, just like with stocks. And when informed traders participate, as mentioned in Questions 29-32, I think it actually helps everyone by making prices more accurate. That benefits not just traders but anyone who looks at the data.
What worries me is the idea of banning or over-restricting these markets. If that happens, people won't just stop trading. They'll move to unregulated offshore platforms where there's no oversight at all. I'd much rather see markets like Kalshi, which operate under CFTC rules, be allowed to thrive. Regulated markets are safer for everyone. Pushing activity offshore, as could happen with overly strict rules, doesn't solve problems. It makes them worse.
I also value the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. This isn't about big institutions keeping all the information to themselves. It's about regular folks like me having a fair shot to engage with these tools. I hope the CFTC considers this balance when looking at public interest questions like those in 7-14.
In closing, I urge you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Address specific risks with targeted rules, but don't shut down or overly limit something that offers real benefits for forecasting, hedging, and public transparency. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Orion Delarosa
