Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is David Deay, and I'm just a regular citizen from Colorado 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 strongly support their existence under fair and sensible regulation. I believe they offer real value to people like me, and I want to see the United States take the lead in this innovative space.
I've been reading up on prediction markets, and what stands out is how they help everyday individuals and businesses manage real risks. For instance, a small business owner in my town could use these markets to hedge against policy changes or economic shifts that might hit their bottom line, like a sudden tariff or tax change tied to an election outcome. That kind of protection isn't gambling, it's practical. I also value my freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. If these platforms are banned or over-restricted, I worry that activity will just move to offshore sites with no oversight. That seems riskier for everyone.
On top of that, I think the US should be at the forefront of financial innovation. We have the talent and the resources to set the standard for how prediction markets work, rather than letting other countries take the lead. If we stifle these markets with heavy-handed rules, we're handing an opportunity to someone else. And one more thing I've learned is that informed trading actually helps everyone. When people with good information trade, the prices reflect reality better. That benefits not just traders, but anyone looking at those prices for insight, whether it's a journalist, a policymaker, or just a curious person like me.
I noticed a few of the questions in your notice that tie into my views. On Question 7, about balancing innovation and consumer protection, I think regulation should focus on clear rules against fraud or manipulation, not broad bans. On Question 29, regarding inside information, I believe informed trading often improves price discovery, and existing laws against insider abuse should be enough if enforced. And on Question 33, about classification and costs, I hope the CFTC considers how over-regulation could push smaller players out or send them offshore.
I urge you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Let's keep them legal and accessible under fair rules, without banning or over-restricting them. That way, people like me can benefit, and the US can stay a leader in this growing field. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
David Deay
