Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Bryce Marcev, and I'm just an everyday citizen from Florida writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. Im not an expert or a lawyer, just someone whos come to value these markets and wants to see them regulated in a fair way, not banned or choked with overreaching rules.
I actively trade on platforms like Kalshi, and Ive seen firsthand how prediction markets offer something you cant get from polls or pundits. Their forecasts are often sharper, more on point, because theyre driven by real people putting real money behind their beliefs. Ive used these insights to make better decisions for my small business, especially when I timed some investments in stock for my company based on market predictions about economic trends. That kind of information isnt just useful to me; its valuable to anyone trying to understand whats coming next, whether its an election or a policy shift.
What worries me is the idea of banning or heavily restricting these markets. I get that there are concerns about manipulation or insider trading, and those are real issues. But the answer isnt to shut things down. Platforms like Kalshi, which are regulated by the CFTC, are a much safer place for people like me to participate compared to unregulated offshore sites. If you make it too hard to trade legally here in the US, folks will just go elsewhere, to places with no oversight at all. Thats not protecting anyone; its pushing the problem out of sight.
Im all for rules that target specific risks. Go after bad actors, enforce the laws on insider trading and manipulation that are already on the books. I think thats the kind of proportionate regulation the CFTC should aim for, not broad categorical bans that punish everyone. In your questions, like numbers 7 and 8 under Public Interest, you ask about balancing innovation with consumer protection. I believe you can do both by keeping legal, regulated markets open to everyday people like me while cracking down on the real threats.
I also noticed questions 23 to 28 about procedural aspects, like when and how to decide if a market serves the public interest. Id urge you to lean toward allowing markets unless theres clear evidence of harm, not the other way around. Dont make it so hard for platforms to operate that only big players can afford to play.
I just want the freedom to keep participating in these markets without fear of them disappearing. Please support sensible regulation of prediction markets that lets regular citizens like me stay involved while addressing legitimate risks. Dont let heavy-handed rules or outright bans push this activity offshore where no one wins.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Bryce Marcev
