Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Nathan Weiss, and I'm just a regular guy from California who cares about having the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. I've been trading on prediction markets like Kalshi for a while now, and I wanted to share why I think these markets are valuable and why the CFTC should support them with fair rules, not bans or heavy-handed restrictions. I'm writing in response to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516), and I hope my perspective as an everyday citizen adds something to your considerations.
I got into prediction markets because I saw how often they get things right when polls and pundits don't. I've watched Kalshi's forecasts on elections and economic data beat out so-called experts time and again. That kind of information isn't just useful for traders like me; it's valuable for everyone who wants a clearer picture of what's likely to happen. Plus, letting regular people like me participate feels fair. If only big institutions can play, they keep all that insight to themselves. I believe democratizing access makes the markets sharper and benefits society as a whole.
I also want to stress that regulated platforms like Kalshi are a much safer place for this activity than unregulated offshore sites. If the CFTC bans or over-restricts prediction markets, you're not stopping the trading; you're just pushing people like me to riskier, less transparent venues. I'd rather stay on a platform overseen by the CFTC, where there are rules and protections in place. Speaking of rules, I know there are concerns about manipulation or insider trading, but aren't those already illegal? The CFTC has strong tools to go after bad actors in other markets. Use those same tools here instead of punishing everyone by shutting things down.
Another thing that bothers me is the idea of calling event contracts "gaming." This isn't a casino. I put time into researching and thinking about real-world events before I trade, just like I would for stocks or commodities. These contracts have legitimate purposes, like hedging risks or discovering accurate prices for uncertain events. Banning them as gambling makes no sense to me. And honestly, the US should be leading the way on financial innovation like this, not letting other countries take the reins while we fall behind.
I'm particularly drawn to questions 7 and 15 in your ANPR, about balancing innovation with consumer protection and defining what counts as gaming. I urge you to focus on proportionate regulation that protects users without stifling a useful tool. Don't let fear of a few bad apples kill something that works for so many of us.
Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts. I strongly support well-regulated prediction markets and ask that the CFTC craft rules that let them thrive while addressing specific risks with targeted solutions.
Sincerely,
Nathan Weiss
