Under this blog title, Christine Hurt comments on the Hahn–Tetlock Op’Ed in Monday’s New York Times. “These [prediction] markets need better lobbyists [than the brick-and-mortar gambling outlets's ones]!”
Which prediction exchanges would lobby for a (brand-new) law allowing speculative prediction markets? Probably InTrade/TradeSports, BetFair, maybe (or maybe not) the Washington Stock Exchange (which could be imagined as hatching a highly secretive plot of some kind, involving some fine scholars), and maybe others. Their main argument would be that these predictive tools have social utility. How would they argue in favor of sports prediction markets, then?
Which prediction exchanges would lobby for the status quo, where only the hedging-oriented prediction markets are accepted? Probably HedgeStreet, whose management tries to educate the public into distinguishing between pure gambling and speculative markets that have hedging capacity once the volume grows. Is HedgeStreet happy under the current CFTC regulations? Only them should answer. Speaking of relaxed CFTC regulations, Robert Hahn and Paul Tetlock made the point that presidential prediction markets should be legal in the U.S. It’s a valid point. I wonder, though, whether the AEI-Brookings guys have heard the rumor that the CFTC has already given its stamp of approval to presidential prediction markets. (My apology in advance if later on this rumor will come as unfounded.)
