Comment Text:
Dear CFTC,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rule that classifies election futures markets as "gaming." This mischaracterization overlooks the critical role these markets play in encouraging informed and engaged voting.
Prediction markets like PredictIt have demonstrated their value in fostering a well-informed electorate. When money is at stake, participants are incentivized to seek out factual, up-to-date information to make informed trading decisions. This is not a game of chance; it is a disciplined exercise in gathering and analyzing political data, which enhances the overall quality of public discourse.
Comparing prediction markets to stock markets further illustrates the flaw in labeling them as gambling. Both markets require participants to research, analyze, and forecast future events to make informed decisions. Just as stock traders evaluate companies' performance and market conditions, prediction market participants assess political events and public opinion. If election futures markets are to be deemed gambling, then by the same logic, stock markets should be classified as gambling as well—a notion that is clearly unreasonable and would never be accepted.
By treating these markets as gambling, the CFTC undermines a valuable tool that helps counter misinformation and encourages civic engagement. PredictIt, with its cap on individual investments, has shown that it can operate with integrity and contribute positively to the public understanding of political events.
I urge the CFTC to reconsider its position and recognize the educational and societal benefits that prediction markets provide.
Sincerely,
Graham LaFebre
