Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Daniel Hoskins, and I'm just a regular guy from Wisconsin who wants to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I've been trading on platforms like Kalshi for a while now, and I believe these markets are valuable for everyday people like me. I support well-regulated prediction markets and hope my perspective can help shape rules that protect consumers while allowing innovation.
I started using prediction markets because I wanted better information about events that affect my life, like elections or economic policies. The forecasts on these platforms are often more accurate than what I hear from polls or pundits on TV. That kind of price discovery helps me make smarter decisions, whether it's planning my budget or just understanding what's coming down the road. I think this benefits everyone, not just traders. If regular folks like me can't participate, that information stays locked up with big institutions, and that's not fair.
I'm also convinced that regulated markets are the way to go. Platforms like Kalshi, under CFTC oversight, give me confidence that there are rules in place to prevent fraud or manipulation. If we ban or over-restrict these markets, people will just turn to unregulated offshore sites with no protections. I've seen those platforms advertised, and they look sketchy. Keeping activity on regulated U.S. markets is safer for consumers and helps the U.S. stay a leader in financial innovation. We shouldn't be handing that advantage to other countries.
Another thing that bothers me is when people call event contracts "gambling." I put real thought into my trades, researching data and trends just like I would for stocks. These contracts aren't slot machines; they serve a purpose, like hedging risks or discovering prices. Classifying them as gaming feels like a misstep when they have clear economic value.
I'd like to address a couple of your specific questions from the ANPR. On Question 7, about balancing innovation and consumer protection, I think regulation should focus on transparency and anti-fraud measures, not outright bans. And for Question 15, on defining gaming versus legitimate markets, I urge you to look at the real economic purposes of event contracts rather than labeling them as bets. Also, on Question 29, about inside information, I believe informed traders actually improve price discovery. The CFTC already has tools to handle insider trading, so let's not punish everyone for the actions of a few.
I hope you'll support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Don't ban or overly restrict them. Keep them accessible to regular people under clear, fair rules that protect us all. Thanks for taking the time to read my comment.
Sincerely,
Daniel Hoskins
