Comment Text:
Commodity Futures Trading Commision,
As a retiree deeply invested in the markets that shape my financial stability and retirement savings, I am writing to express my support for Kalshi's election contracts. The benefits of introducing these contracts are clear and numerous. This comment will outline why I believe the CFTC has gone wrong:
Firstly, Kalshi’s proposed contracts will ensure all market participants are identified and subject to rigorous know-your-customer and anti-money laundering protocols. This level of transparency, including audit trails and regulatory oversight, is unmatched by alternative data sources, which often lack federal regulation and clear disclosure standards. Unlike traditional polling, which can't always verify the identities or motivations of respondents, Kalshi offers a regulated environment where predictive information is both transparent and trustworthy.
Secondly, polling data has grown increasingly unreliable due to respondents' hesitancy to share truthful information and biases introduced by modern communication methods. Kalshi’s market participants, driven by financial incentives, are more likely to provide accurate predictions. This accuracy, free from the biases that affect other predictive methodologies, enhances market reliability. The insights gained from Kalshi’s contracts can help me and others adjust our financial strategies, particularly in anticipating changes in bond markets tied to election outcomes.
Thirdly, Kalshi’s differentiated market allows knowledgeable observers to express their judgments, fostering competitiveness, accuracy, and transparency across all predictive forms. This informed participation enriches the overall marketplace, providing a clearer picture for all investors. Concerns about potential market manipulation through Kalshi are largely unfounded. Manipulators would be disincentivized by the need to identify themselves and face regulatory scrutiny. Instead, they would likely resort to less regulated avenues like social media. Moreover, the ambiguous relationship between market signals and electoral outcomes further diminishes the potential for manipulation.
Additionally, Kalshi’s contract will not monopolize the electorate’s perception of election outcomes. Voters will still have access to diverse predictive sources, allowing them to weigh Kalshi’s information against other data. The integrity of Kalshi’s market will foster public trust, ensuring the contract's predictive results remain unbiased and accurate.
Finally, the public’s reliance on Kalshi’s predictive information will depend on their confidence in the contract's integrity. This trust will drive the contract's value to society, ensuring that its sponsors maintain an unbiased and accurate marketplace.
In conclusion, Kalshi’s election contracts will provide a tool for managing financial risk and enhancing market transparency, including for retirees like myself.
– H. Fealman
