Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Kevin Sewell, and I'm an everyday citizen from California writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I've been actively trading on platforms like Kalshi for a while now, and I strongly support the development of well-regulated prediction markets. I believe they provide unique value to people like me and to society as a whole, and I hope the CFTC will craft rules that allow these markets to thrive without over-restricting them.
As someone who trades on prediction markets, I've seen firsthand how they produce better forecasts than polls or pundits. The prices reflect real-time, crowd-sourced wisdom that often beats expert opinions. This isn't just useful for traders; it helps everyone by providing clearer information for public decision-making. I also use these markets to hedge personal risks. For example, Ive placed trades on election outcomes that could impact my taxes and on economic indicators like CPI that affect my cost of living. This isn't gambling. It takes research and judgment, much like investing in stocks, and I believe event contracts serve legitimate economic purposes, not gaming.
Im also worried about what happens if these markets are banned or overly restricted. Right now, platforms like Kalshi are regulated and transparent, which makes them safe for people like me. If the CFTC clamps down too hard, activity will just move to unregulated offshore platforms where theres no oversight. Thats worse for everyone. The U.S. should lead in this space, not push innovation away. Academic research backs this up too. Studies by economists like Hanson and Wolfers show prediction markets aggregate information efficiently, and the data they produce is often more transparent than other sources.
Id like to address a few specific questions from the ANPR. On Question 7, regarding public interest, I think prediction markets clearly serve the public by improving price discovery and risk management. On Question 15, about defining gaming, I urge the CFTC not to classify event contracts as gambling since they have real economic utility. And on Question 23, about procedural aspects, I believe the CFTC should make public interest determinations with a focus on innovation and access, not broad bans.
I understand concerns about manipulation or insider trading, but those are already illegal under existing laws. The CFTC has the tools to enforce against bad actors without punishing the rest of us by shutting down these markets. Please focus on targeted, proportionate rules instead of blanket restrictions.
I respectfully ask the CFTC to support the growth of regulated prediction markets. Theyre a valuable tool for ordinary people like me, and with the right oversight, they can benefit society without unnecessary risk. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Kevin Sewell
