Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Anthony Ramon, and I'm just an everyday 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 taken the time to learn about them, and I strongly support their existence under fair and reasonable regulation. I believe these markets offer unique value to people like me, and I want to make sure my voice is heard before you draft formal rules.
I value the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets, and prediction markets are no different. These aren't games of chance or gambling, no matter what some might say. They serve real economic purposes, like helping people understand the likelihood of important events and even hedging against risks that affect our lives. For example, I run a small side business selling handmade goods online, and political or economic changes, like new tariffs or tax policies, can hit my bottom line hard. Being able to trade on a prediction market about an election outcome or a policy decision could help me plan better and protect myself financially. That's not gaming; it's using information to make smart choices, just like investing in stocks or bonds.
I understand there are concerns about things like manipulation or insider trading, and I get why those are issues. But banning or over-restricting these markets isn't the answer. The CFTC already has laws and tools to go after bad actors in other markets, and those should apply here too. Shutting down prediction markets to stop a few cheaters would be like closing the highway because some people speed. It punishes everyone else whos just trying to get somewhere. Plus, regulated markets are safer than pushing activity to shady offshore platforms where theres no oversight at all.
I noticed a few of the questions in your notice that relate to my concerns, like Question 15 about defining gaming versus legitimate markets. I urge you to classify event contracts based on their economic purpose, not lump them in with gambling. Theyre tools for information and planning, not slot machines. Also, in Question 7 about balancing innovation and consumer protection, I think you can do both by setting clear rules without broad bans.
Im asking you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Let regular folks like me have access to these tools under fair guidelines. Dont let heavy-handed restrictions or outright bans take away a market that can help us make sense of an uncertain world. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Anthony Ramon
