Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

If states can impose additional requirements or penalties on exchanges, then we don't have a federal market system in the United States—we have a race to the bottom. The CFTC will continue to defend its exclusive jurisdiction over commodity derivatives where states attempt to nullify federal law.

ChairmanSelig's profile picture

Mike Selig

18,277 subscribers

35,396 просмотров • 1 месяц назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Congress gave the CFTC the exclusive authority to regulate prediction markets. The CFTC will not only defend its jurisdiction against states seeking to nullify federal law and apply state anti-gaming laws to DCMs, we’ll exercise it by establishing clear rules of the road for these markets. 📺👇
1:22

Congress gave the CFTC the exclusive authority to regulate prediction markets. The CFTC will not only defend its jurisdiction against states seeking to nullify federal law and apply state anti-gaming laws to DCMs, we’ll exercise it by establishing clear rules of the road for these markets. 📺👇

Mike Selig

20,032 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Federal law makes it clear that the CFTC regulates derivatives. Whether it's sports, politics, or oil prices, the CFTC has clear jurisdiction under the federal regulatory framework to oversee prediction markets, and we have an obligation to defend our statute. Watch more on Squawk Box ⬇️
1:17

Federal law makes it clear that the CFTC regulates derivatives. Whether it's sports, politics, or oil prices, the CFTC has clear jurisdiction under the federal regulatory framework to oversee prediction markets, and we have an obligation to defend our statute. Watch more on Squawk Box ⬇️

Mike Selig

12,834 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Jasmine Crockett: "The problem is that Americans thought it was okay to take a full-fledged criminal and make him the President of the United States and then they want to act aghast when he does criminal things. Let me tell you, we have a thug in charge of the United States and if we don't wake up we may not have a United States."
0:21

Jasmine Crockett: "The problem is that Americans thought it was okay to take a full-fledged criminal and make him the President of the United States and then they want to act aghast when he does criminal things. Let me tell you, we have a thug in charge of the United States and if we don't wake up we may not have a United States."

Josh Keatley 💙🌈🚺🟧🌊

62,817 просмотров • 1 год назад

Jasmine Crockett: "The problem is that Americans thought it was okay to take a full fledged criminal and make him the President of the United States and then they want to act aghast when he does criminal things. Let me tell you, we have a thug in charge of the United States and if we don't wake up we may not have a United States."
0:59

Jasmine Crockett: "The problem is that Americans thought it was okay to take a full fledged criminal and make him the President of the United States and then they want to act aghast when he does criminal things. Let me tell you, we have a thug in charge of the United States and if we don't wake up we may not have a United States."

Aaron Rupar

2,686,586 просмотров • 1 год назад

If we don't do something to secure the integrity of our elections, we could soon lose our constitutional republic. There are actions the federal government can take to incentivize states like California to clean up their election processes. Go back to 1974 with me for a moment. President Nixon signed a bill into law called the Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act. It essentially placed pressure on the states to behave the way that the federal government wanted them to behave in a situation where the federal government didn't have a direct authority to dictate something to the states. States were essentially required to set the speed limit on their highways at 55 miles an hour. If a state didn't do this, then it did not receive federal highway funds. States across the country complied because they wanted that money from the federal government. Ten years later in 1984, President Reagan signed into law a bill called the National Minimum Drinking Age Act. It authorized the secretary of transportation to withhold a portion of the annual federal highway funding allotted to individual states if the state did not comply with making the drinking age 21 years old. States could not afford to lose that funding, so eventually, all 50 states raised the legal drinking age to 21 years old. Those are two examples of negative reinforcement from the federal government. There's also a precedent of positive reinforcement regarding children's car seats and booster seats. There was a law that was passed in 2005 that told states, if you align your car seat and booster seat laws to the federal government's recommendations, then you receive additional funding. Why doesn't President Trump do this? Why doesn't the United States Congress—controlled by Republicans in the House and the Senate—withhold funding from California until election integrity measures have been put in place? The federal government has multiple options and actions it can take to ensure the integrity of California elections. We, as United States citizens, have no obligation to trust an election that isn't guaranteed to be free and fair by the administrators who are running that election.
2:58

If we don't do something to secure the integrity of our elections, we could soon lose our constitutional republic. There are actions the federal government can take to incentivize states like California to clean up their election processes. Go back to 1974 with me for a moment. President Nixon signed a bill into law called the Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act. It essentially placed pressure on the states to behave the way that the federal government wanted them to behave in a situation where the federal government didn't have a direct authority to dictate something to the states. States were essentially required to set the speed limit on their highways at 55 miles an hour. If a state didn't do this, then it did not receive federal highway funds. States across the country complied because they wanted that money from the federal government. Ten years later in 1984, President Reagan signed into law a bill called the National Minimum Drinking Age Act. It authorized the secretary of transportation to withhold a portion of the annual federal highway funding allotted to individual states if the state did not comply with making the drinking age 21 years old. States could not afford to lose that funding, so eventually, all 50 states raised the legal drinking age to 21 years old. Those are two examples of negative reinforcement from the federal government. There's also a precedent of positive reinforcement regarding children's car seats and booster seats. There was a law that was passed in 2005 that told states, if you align your car seat and booster seat laws to the federal government's recommendations, then you receive additional funding. Why doesn't President Trump do this? Why doesn't the United States Congress—controlled by Republicans in the House and the Senate—withhold funding from California until election integrity measures have been put in place? The federal government has multiple options and actions it can take to ensure the integrity of California elections. We, as United States citizens, have no obligation to trust an election that isn't guaranteed to be free and fair by the administrators who are running that election.

Liz Wheeler

10,556 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

We have officially entered 1984 territory: I.C.E. agents can ignore the law, shoot someone ten times and The United States Government will lie to defend their own.
0:24

We have officially entered 1984 territory: I.C.E. agents can ignore the law, shoot someone ten times and The United States Government will lie to defend their own.

Van Jones

30,568 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Kalshi is caught between states telling it to stop and the CFTC telling it to keep going "What do you do here if you're Kalshi? You have states like Minnesota and New York that I've told you about in the past, multiple other states telling you to cease operation. Then you have the CFTC, of one Mike Selig, coming over the top rope and telling you that you have to continue offering these services to customers in those states, even though those states are telling you that you cannot" "So this order keeps Kalshi operating in New York, but it certainly does not resolve the underlying lawsuit or the underlying turf battle that we've had constantly" "This is not a crypto story, but it's a huge story about how the states and the federal government will behave when it comes to regulation, which informs what we may see in a world with no Clarity Act where the regulators are effectively in charge of what happens with crypto. This is states versus the federal government at a level we haven't seen in a long time, and it's about control of an entire new category of financial markets"
1:00

Kalshi is caught between states telling it to stop and the CFTC telling it to keep going "What do you do here if you're Kalshi? You have states like Minnesota and New York that I've told you about in the past, multiple other states telling you to cease operation. Then you have the CFTC, of one Mike Selig, coming over the top rope and telling you that you have to continue offering these services to customers in those states, even though those states are telling you that you cannot" "So this order keeps Kalshi operating in New York, but it certainly does not resolve the underlying lawsuit or the underlying turf battle that we've had constantly" "This is not a crypto story, but it's a huge story about how the states and the federal government will behave when it comes to regulation, which informs what we may see in a world with no Clarity Act where the regulators are effectively in charge of what happens with crypto. This is states versus the federal government at a level we haven't seen in a long time, and it's about control of an entire new category of financial markets"

The Wolf Of All Streets

27,722 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Linda McMahon: "The states will have less requirements because more money will go in block grants to the states ... I have called for a hard reset of education because we have failed our students."
1:05

Linda McMahon: "The states will have less requirements because more money will go in block grants to the states ... I have called for a hard reset of education because we have failed our students."

Aaron Rupar

110,306 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Ex-CFTC chairman Chris Giancarlo's argument on why prediction markets fall under federal rather than state jurisdiction "This Sunday I'm putting out a podcast I recorded with ex CFTC chairman Chris Giancarlo, and he made a very clear point, that this is CFTC jurisdiction and not the states at all, that it's going to go to the Supreme Court and the CFTC is going to win" "His argument was that for the states to be the regulator, there had to be a middleman. A prediction market contract, whether on sports or anything else, is a binary bet between you and me over the outcome" "States get to regulate things like casinos, where there's a house in between keeping a vig. But these contracts do not count"
1:07

Ex-CFTC chairman Chris Giancarlo's argument on why prediction markets fall under federal rather than state jurisdiction "This Sunday I'm putting out a podcast I recorded with ex CFTC chairman Chris Giancarlo, and he made a very clear point, that this is CFTC jurisdiction and not the states at all, that it's going to go to the Supreme Court and the CFTC is going to win" "His argument was that for the states to be the regulator, there had to be a middleman. A prediction market contract, whether on sports or anything else, is a binary bet between you and me over the outcome" "States get to regulate things like casinos, where there's a house in between keeping a vig. But these contracts do not count"

The Wolf Of All Streets

24,433 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

90% of our vehicles are sold in the United States, with most of the rest sold here in Canada. We don't have the time to quickly diversify this market. We need to work with the United States. What do you think of Pierre's proposal on this?
3:18

90% of our vehicles are sold in the United States, with most of the rest sold here in Canada. We don't have the time to quickly diversify this market. We need to work with the United States. What do you think of Pierre's proposal on this?

Canada Proud

16,330 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Warren Buffett on paying taxes: "If we send a check like we did last year... and if 800 other companies had done the same thing, no other person in the United States would have had to pay a dime in federal taxes."
1:10

Warren Buffett on paying taxes: "If we send a check like we did last year... and if 800 other companies had done the same thing, no other person in the United States would have had to pay a dime in federal taxes."

Watcher.Guru

2,205,287 просмотров • 2 лет назад

We filed a brief urging the Supreme Court of the United States to enforce federal anti-discrimination law and prohibit race-based admissions at universities, including Harvard, that accept federal funds. AFL President Stephen Miller explains:
0:41

We filed a brief urging the Supreme Court of the United States to enforce federal anti-discrimination law and prohibit race-based admissions at universities, including Harvard, that accept federal funds. AFL President Stephen Miller explains:

America First Legal

39,188 просмотров • 3 лет назад

"Other nations have been stealing the moviemaking capabilities from the United States," says President Donald J. Trump. "Hollywood is being destroyed ... If they're not willing to make a movie inside the United States, then we should have a tariff on movies that come in."
0:54

"Other nations have been stealing the moviemaking capabilities from the United States," says President Donald J. Trump. "Hollywood is being destroyed ... If they're not willing to make a movie inside the United States, then we should have a tariff on movies that come in."

Rapid Response 47

268,307 просмотров • 1 год назад