Author: Jonah Roberts, Bankless; Translated by: Bai Shui, Golden Finance
Cryptocurrency used to be a political afterthought, but it has quickly become the focal point of the 2024 presidential election.
While there is certainly a significant grassroots force behind this initiative, the election has also sparked unprecedented lobbying efforts in support of cryptocurrency, backed by the industry's most powerful players.
Cryptocurrency has become the largest lobbying spender in this cycle. Fairshake has raised over $200 million from major donors such as Coinbase, Andreessen Horowitz, and Ripple, and similar groups have devoted substantial resources to support bipartisan political campaigns, all with one goal: to help candidates who support cryptocurrency win.
This is a significant investment, but is it worth the money spent?
Public perspective
Polls show that Americans are increasingly optimistic about the role of blockchain in finance. Public education around the potential of cryptocurrency to promote financial inclusion has also had an impact. In 2024 election polling, 48% of potential U.S. voters agreed that 'relying less on banks and more on automated technology for financial innovation will lead to a fairer global economy.' The same poll also indicated growing interest in cryptocurrency ownership and investment.
The increasingly important role of cryptocurrency in public discourse has undoubtedly contributed to these shifts in sentiment. While this movement has largely been grassroots and privately funded thus far, it is certain that policymakers are beginning to lend their support. Crafting positive policies and consumer protections is crucial for enhancing public trust in this emerging industry.
Current political landscape
So how is the political landscape actually being shaped? As cryptocurrency's role on the political stage becomes increasingly apparent, both U.S. presidential candidates have been compelled to take a stand and speak directly to the industry.
Donald Trump has boldly promised that if elected, he will 'make America the Bitcoin capital of the world.' While his forays into the crypto space—including DeFi projects on Ethereum and Trump trading cards—have at times been unimpressive, his pro-crypto rhetoric has still garnered considerable support within the industry.
Meanwhile, Kamala Harris's relationship with the cryptocurrency community is more complex; she served as Vice President alongside SEC Chairman Gary Gensler during a time of increased regulation. As Immutable becomes the latest company to receive a Wells notice from the SEC, industry frustration has reached historic levels. While the necessity for clear regulation is widely accepted, the SEC's approach (demanding registration without providing a clear path) feels punitive rather than effective. American companies attempting to work with the SEC have faced lawsuits instead of guidance.
Now, Harris aims to signal a shift, indicating her intent to 'encourage innovative technologies like artificial intelligence and digital assets while protecting consumers and investors.' She also specifically mentioned protecting the cryptocurrency investments of Black Americans. While advocacy groups like 'Stand With Crypto' believe her words, many remain cautious, questioning whether this pivot is genuine or merely an attempt to attract a large voter base ahead of the election.
Sustainable efforts?
As cryptocurrency lobbying continues to expand, many question whether this money will genuinely elevate the status of ideologically aligned thinkers within the government, or if it will simply allow those willing to say the right things to line their pockets. As the political lobbying power of cryptocurrency grows, several key issues are sure to arise:
Can we trust those who lobby for cryptocurrency to represent the interests of the broader field? While people may trust Coinbase more, remember that not long ago, SBF was leading the industry's charge in Washington. How can we ensure that lobbyists representing the most powerful players in the cryptocurrency space (now including financial giants like BlackRock) express concerns about advancing the values of cryptocurrency rather than just the private interests of companies cutting checks?
Can we trust the political support we are providing? Political lobbying often feels like it is not the most effective use of capital, but in a regulatory environment that actively stifles innovation in the field, it offers a path forward. The lingering question is whether we are winning and elevating new cryptocurrency converts in Washington or simply attracting the most ideologically flexible candidates.
However, as cryptocurrency gains political recognition and lobbying funds flood in—shaping the views of Congress and key political figures—many question the alignment of cryptocurrency's fundamental ideals with this effort.
Reflection
Broad political lobbying does not entirely align with an industry predicated on finding better pathways for our financial and governance systems. So can we honestly say this is the best way forward?
This is a complex issue, but here is my personal stance:
Cryptocurrency is not a stubborn technology. It does not favor grassroots adopters nor does it favor institutional adopters. Therefore, cryptocurrency is not inherently anti-establishment; it is simply embraced by many who hold these values. As Congressman Ritchie Torres wisely shared, cryptocurrency benefits every political inclination: for liberals, it offers the opportunity for greater freedom from the government; for progressives, it presents a chance to check corporate power; for conservatives, it is a means to create a more accessible free market.
How we regulate this technology is crucial, but viewing it as a partisan issue would be counterproductive. Politicians need to see the true nature of cryptocurrency: a fair technology stack with diverse use cases.
Ultimately, we hope that all this lobbying money can help legislators broaden their understanding of cryptocurrency and increase awareness of its potential impact. I am cautiously optimistic that this shift is happening, partly because discussions surrounding cryptocurrency are expanding, and partly because legislators like Congressman Ro Khanna indicate that change is indeed occurring internally.
While the impact of cryptocurrency political spending may not be fully clear until January and beyond (when the next U.S. president is sworn in), I hope that a new era for cryptocurrency can emerge regardless of the election outcomes. In this era, cryptocurrency will be better understood, better regulated, and ultimately better serve the global crowd that is already using it, curious about it, or even opposed to its existence.
