Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Onika Tirado, and Im a resident of Hawaii. Ive worked my way up from entry-level jobs to owning a business, and now I focus on cybersecurity and practical AI solutions in the tech space. Im all about identifying goals and doing what it takes to achieve them, which is why Im writing to support well-regulated prediction markets in response to your Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). Im new to these markets, but I see their value and potential, and Im concerned about efforts to shut them down before everyday people like me can even participate.
I believe in choice. People arent powerless, but choices only exist if opportunities are allowed to. Prediction markets, like those on platforms such as Kalshi, offer a legal, regulated way for regular folks to engage with real-world events, make informed decisions, and even hedge personal risks. This isnt gambling, no matter what some critics say. Researching and trading on these event contracts takes skill and judgment, just like investing in stocks. Classifying them as gaming ignores their legitimate economic purpose, whether its price discovery or managing uncertainty. Ive seen people complain about a lack of opportunity while trying to block platforms like this. Thats a contradiction. You cant reject new paths and then blame the system for leaving you behind.
I also worry that banning or over-restricting these markets will just push activity offshore to unregulated spaces. Thats not safer for anyone. Regulated markets under CFTC oversight, with consumer protections in place, are the better option. The US should be leading in financial innovation, not handing the advantage to other countries. Plus, academic research backs this up. Studies show prediction markets aggregate information better than polls, and informed trading actually improves price accuracy for everyone, not just traders. Thats a public good.
Id like to address a couple of your specific questions. On Question 8 under Public Interest, I think prediction markets clearly serve the public by providing unique data transparency and forecasting tools. And on Question 15 under Listed Activities, I urge you not to treat event contracts as gaming. They have real economic utility, and broad categorical bans would stifle access and innovation. Targeted, proportionate rules to address risks like manipulation or insider trading make more sense. You already have tools for that. Use them.
Im preparing for a future where individual participation in systems like this grows, and I dont want to see these doors closed before theyre even fully opened. Please support proportionate regulation of prediction markets that allows everyday people to engage while protecting consumers through oversight. Dont let over-restriction or outright bans push opportunity out of reach.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Onika Tirado
