Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Matthew Priestas, and I'm a policy professional based in Virginia. I'm writing to express my support for well-regulated prediction markets in response to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I've used prediction markets a few times myself, and I believe they serve a valuable purpose for individuals and society when properly overseen by the CFTC.
As someone who works in policy and government, Ive seen firsthand how hard it is to get reliable information on what might happen with elections, economic shifts, or major events. Prediction markets have consistently produced more accurate forecasts than traditional polls or pundit opinions. Ive relied on platforms like these to get a clearer picture of potential outcomes, whether its an election result or a policy change. That kind of aggregated insight isnt just useful to me; it benefits the public, media, and even decision-makers who need to understand trends and probabilities. Its not gambling. Its a tool for making sense of complex, uncertain situations through real-world data and incentives.
I also strongly value the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. Prediction markets democratize access to information and financial tools. They let regular people like me have a stake in understanding and engaging with public events, rather than leaving all the insight and opportunity to big institutions. Shutting down or over-restricting these markets would push activity to unregulated, offshore platforms, which helps no one. Id much rather see the CFTC create clear rules that keep these markets safe and transparent right here in the U.S.
Id like to address a couple of specific questions from the ANPR. On Question 7, regarding public interest, I believe prediction markets serve the public by providing unique forecasting data that isnt available elsewhere, and the CFTC should balance innovation with consumer protection through targeted rules, not bans. On Question 15, about defining legitimate markets versus gaming, I argue these contracts are fundamentally about research and judgment, much like any other investment, and should not be classified as gambling.
Im not blind to concerns like insider trading or manipulation, but those issues are already illegal under existing laws. The CFTC has the authority to enforce against bad actors without punishing everyone else by restricting or banning these markets. Lets focus on using those tools effectively.
In closing, I urge the CFTC to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Theyre a powerful resource for forecasting and civic engagement, and with the right oversight, they can thrive while protecting participants. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Matthew Priestas
