Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Satria Mandala, and Im a healthcare professional from Texas. Im writing to express my support for the proportionate regulation of prediction markets as outlined in the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). While I dont actively trade on these platforms, I follow them closely and believe they offer unique value to individuals like me and to society as a whole. I appreciate the chance to share my perspective on this issue.
As someone working in healthcare, I often deal with uncertainty, whether its about policy changes affecting my field or economic shifts impacting my personal finances. Prediction markets stand out to me because they provide information I cant find elsewhere. Ive noticed how often their forecasts beat out polls or pundits when it comes to predicting election outcomes or economic trends. That kind of insight isnt just helpful for traders; its valuable for anyone trying to make informed decisions. I think its critical that regular people like me have the freedom to participate in these legal, regulated markets if we choose to. Shutting out everyday citizens while letting big institutions dominate would only limit access to this information and make the system less fair.
I also see real economic purpose in event contracts, especially for hedging risks. For instance, a policy change or election result could directly affect healthcare regulations, which in turn impacts my work and income. Being able to hedge against those uncertainties would be a practical tool, not a game. I strongly believe event contracts shouldnt be labeled as gaming. They require research and judgment, much like any other investment. Treating them as gambling dismisses their legitimate role in managing financial risk and discovering accurate prices.
Regarding some of the specific questions in the ANPR, Id like to address Question 15 on defining gaming versus legitimate markets. These contracts arent about luck; theyre about analyzing real-world events and data. They serve a purpose beyond entertainment, and I urge the CFTC to recognize that distinction. Also, in response to Question 7 on balancing innovation and consumer protection, I believe the answer lies in targeted rules, not broad restrictions. The CFTC already has tools to combat manipulation and insider trading. Use those instead of limiting access for everyone.
Im not blind to the risks. Theres always a chance of bad actors trying to game the system. But banning or over-restricting prediction markets punishes the wrong people. Regulated platforms are safer than pushing activity offshore to unchecked sites. I trust the CFTC can find a balanced approach.
In closing, I ask that you support well-regulated prediction markets with rules that address specific risks without stifling participation or innovation. Lets keep these markets accessible to regular folks like me who see their value. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Satria Mandala
