Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Jesse Michalski, and I'm just a regular citizen from South Carolina 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 reasonable regulation. I believe they offer unique value and that the CFTC has a chance to get this right.
I care deeply about having the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. Prediction markets aren't gambling in my view. They serve real purposes, like helping people make sense of uncertain events or even hedge against risks that affect their lives. For example, if I'm worried about how an election might impact policies that hit my wallet, trading on a regulated platform could give me a way to manage that uncertainty. It's not a game; it's a tool. Calling it gambling feels like a stretch when it takes research and real-world judgment, just like any other kind of investing.
I'm also concerned about safety and fairness. That's why I think regulated markets, like Kalshi operating under CFTC oversight, are a much better option than pushing people toward unregulated offshore platforms. If the rules are too tight or broad categories get banned, folks like me might look elsewhere, and those places don't have the protections a CFTC-registered market would. It just makes sense to keep activity here, where there are rules and accountability.
On that note, I believe the CFTC already has strong tools to handle issues like manipulation or insider trading. There's no need to reinvent the wheel or ban entire markets to stop a few bad actors. Use what's already in place to crack down on abuse without punishing everyone else. I also think the U.S. should be a leader in financial innovation. If we over-restrict prediction markets, we're handing the future of this technology to other countries. We can't afford to fall behind on something with so much potential.
Looking at the specific questions in the ANPR, I want to address a few from the Public Interest section, like Question 7 on balancing innovation and consumer protection. I think the balance comes from clear rules, not outright bans. And for Question 14, comparing these markets to other financial tools, I see them as closer to investing than anything else. They're not perfect, sure, but the risks can be managed with oversight.
I urge the CFTC to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Don't ban or overly restrict them. Keep them accessible to regular people like me, under rules that protect us without killing the benefits. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Jesse Michalski
