Comment on CFTC-2026-1189, CFTC-2026-1189-0001, Stevie, Mallia

Dear Chairman and Commissioners: My name is Stevie Mallia, and Im an everyday citizen from Illinois who actively trades event contracts on Kalshi and similar platforms. Im writing in support of the CFTCs proposed rule, Prediction Markets; Public Interest Determinations, RIN 3038-AF65, published at 91 FR 35806. I support the Commissions decision to review contracts individually under Regulation 40.11 and explain the reasons for each decision. Please keep that approach in the final rule. As someone who actually trades event contracts, I want clear and reliable rules. I also want to understand why a particular contract is allowed or prohibited. Reviewing the facts is much better than banning an entire category in advance and making legitimate products disappear without a specific explanation. The proposal is also right to recognize what happens when demand is pushed away from regulated U.S. exchanges. If people cant trade a lawful contract here, many will look for it on an offshore site. Those sites may lack fund segregation, market surveillance, and any meaningful recourse when something goes wrong. The demand doesnt disappear because an onshore contract is prohibited. It simply moves somewhere less safe. That practical reality should remain front and center in the final rule. I also support the proposals recognition that market prices have information value even when a trader isnt using a contract as a traditional hedge. When I follow a game or tournament, I can look at prices for the winner, point spread, or season outcome to see how expectations are changing. Thats useful information. People use prediction-market prices as signals about sports, the economy, policy, and other events. Mainstream sports markets serve the public interest and belong on well-regulated, CFTC-overseen exchanges. Contracts based on final scores and who wins, point spreads and margins of victory, season-long and tournament outcomes, and player or team statistical totals settle using objective, publicly verifiable results. No single ordinary participant can control the final score of a major game or the outcome of an entire tournament. These markets produce useful information and should operate under clear, dependable rules. I understand that the Commission has legitimate concerns about other types of contracts. Im not defending contracts based on player injuries, in-game fights or altercations, or youth and pre-collegiate sports. I also support prohibiting contracts involving war, death, assassination, and terrorism. Please finalize the proposal while preserving its contract-by-contract review, reasoned decisions, recognition of offshore displacement, and broad treatment of price discovery and information value. Those features will give everyday traders clearer rules while keeping activity on transparent, regulated U.S. exchanges. Sincerely, Stevie Mallia