Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Josh Stadler, and I'm a healthcare professional from Virginia. I'm writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I actively trade on platforms like Kalshi, and I strongly support the development of well-regulated prediction markets in the United States. I believe they provide unique value to individuals like me, as well as to society at large, and I urge the CFTC to adopt proportionate regulations rather than overly restrictive rules or bans.
As someone working in healthcare, I often face uncertainty around policy changes or economic shifts that can impact my profession, from insurance reforms to budget decisions tied to election outcomes. Prediction markets have given me a way to access information that I can't find anywhere else. I've seen firsthand how their forecasts on elections and public events are often more accurate than polls or pundits. For instance, during the last election cycle, I relied on market predictions to better understand potential outcomes that could affect healthcare funding in Virginia. That kind of insight helps me make informed decisions, and I believe it benefits the public too, by offering clearer data for everyone to use.
I also value the ability to hedge real risks through these markets. Whether it's an election result that might change tax policies or a federal decision impacting healthcare costs, having a tool to offset uncertainty is practical. This isn't gambling, it's a thoughtful process of research and judgment, much like any other investment. I worry that labeling these markets as "gaming" or banning broad categories of contracts would unfairly limit access for regular people like me, while big institutions might still find ways to participate.
On the topic of potential issues like manipulation or insider trading, I understand the concern, and I appreciate the CFTC raising these in questions 1 through 6 and 29 through 32. But I believe the agency already has strong tools to address bad actors. Manipulation and insider trading are illegal, and the CFTC can enforce those rules without shutting down entire markets. Banning or over-restricting prediction markets would likely just push activity to unregulated offshore platforms, which is worse for everyone. Instead, targeted rules addressing specific risks make more sense.
I also think the US should be a leader in financial innovation. If we over-regulate, we risk ceding ground to other countries. And regarding question 7 on public interest, I believe informed trading actually improves price discovery, benefiting all participants by creating more accurate market signals. This isn't just about traders, it's about better information for public decision-making.
I'm asking the CFTC to support regulated prediction markets with fair, balanced rules. Please don't ban or overly restrict them. Allow individuals like me to continue participating in legal, transparent markets that provide real value.
Sincerely,
Josh Stadler
