Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Joshua Jackson, and I'm a novelist from Texas. I'm writing to express my support for well-regulated prediction markets in response to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I'm fairly new to these markets, but I've come to see their value and believe they deserve a fair regulatory framework that allows everyday people like me to participate.
As someone who writes stories for a living, I'm fascinated by how prediction markets can tell us things about the world that polls and pundits often miss. I've seen firsthand how unreliable traditional forecasts can be, especially around elections or big public events. Prediction markets, though, seem to cut through the noise. They aggregate what people really think, based on where they're willing to put their money. That kind of accuracy isn't just useful for traders; it helps everyone, from writers like me who want to understand the zeitgeist, to regular folks trying to make sense of the future.
I also believe strongly in the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. Prediction markets aren't some exclusive club for Wall Street types. They let ordinary people have a voice, and that's a good thing. If only big institutions can play, the valuable information these markets produce stays locked away. Allowing informed trading by everyday citizens improves price discovery and benefits all participants, not just a select few. I'm not saying there shouldn't be rules, but those rules should make space for people like me to engage without fear of overreach or outright bans.
On the topic of what these markets are, I don't see event contracts as gambling. They're more like investing. When I research a topic for a novel, I dig into details, weigh evidence, and make judgments. Trading on a prediction market feels similar. It takes thought and analysis, not just luck. These contracts serve real purposes, like helping people hedge against uncertainty or understand risks. I think the CFTC should recognize that distinction when considering definitions, as raised in Questions 15 to 22 about listed activities and gaming.
I'm aware of concerns like insider trading or manipulation, and those are valid. But banning or over-restricting prediction markets isn't the answer. The CFTC already has tools to tackle bad actors, as noted in Questions 29 to 32 on inside information. Use those tools instead of punishing everyone else. Informed trading can actually help make prices more accurate, and that benefits the whole market.
I urge the CFTC to develop proportionate regulations that support innovation and access while addressing specific risks with targeted rules. Prediction markets have a lot to offer, and I hope you'll ensure they remain open to regular citizens like me under a fair framework.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Joshua Jackson
