Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Mark Gutierrez, and I'm an everyday citizen from Illinois writing to comment on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I actively trade on platforms like Kalshi, and I strongly support the CFTC adopting proportionate regulations for prediction markets rather than imposing broad bans or over-restrictions.
I work hard, pay taxes on my income, and believe my money is mine to use as I see fit, so long as it's legal. Trading on prediction markets isn't just a hobby for me; it's a way to stay informed and manage risks that affect my life. I've used these platforms to hedge personal financial uncertainties, like betting on election outcomes that could impact my taxes or local regulations affecting my budget. This isn't gambling. It takes research and real-world judgment, much like any other investment I might make. Classifying event contracts as "gaming" ignores their legitimate economic purpose, and I urge the CFTC to recognize this distinction when addressing questions 15 through 22 on listed activities.
Prediction markets also provide information I can't get anywhere else. Their forecasts on elections and public events have consistently been more accurate than polls or pundits. That benefits everyone, not just traders like me. On questions 7 through 14 about public interest, I believe this forecasting value and the democratization of access outweigh overly restrictive concerns. Letting regular folks participate makes prices more accurate and keeps valuable insights from being locked up with big institutions.
I'm also concerned about the risks of over-regulation. Banning or heavily restricting these markets won't stop trading; it'll just push activity to unregulated offshore platforms where there's no oversight. Regulated markets like Kalshi are far safer, and the CFTC should focus on strengthening those protections rather than driving innovation away. On questions 23 through 28 about procedural aspects, I think the CFTC should prioritize categorical frameworks that support regulated markets over individual bans that risk pushing activity abroad. The US should lead in financial innovation, not cede ground to other countries.
Finally, on questions 29 through 32 about inside information, I believe informed trading actually improves price discovery and helps everyone. The answer isn't to ban markets but to enforce existing laws against insider trading by government officials like Senators or members of Congress. Targeted rules, not broad prohibitions, are the way forward.
I respectfully ask the CFTC to support well-regulated prediction markets with balanced, proportionate rules that address specific risks without stifling innovation or punishing law-abiding citizens like me. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Mark Gutierrez
