Are US politics confrontational enough to make crypto a partisan issue?

As the perceived legitimacy of blockchain technology increases, US politicians have shown increasing interest in turning this non-partisa...

As the perceived legitimacy of blockchain technology increases, US politicians have shown increasing interest in turning this non-partisan technology into a matter of political division.

Speaking by video to an audience at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in Singapore on Friday, former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton noted While cryptocurrencies were an “interesting” technology, they also had the power to undermine the US dollar and destabilize nations – “perhaps by starting small but going much bigger”. Although he is no longer the leader of the Democratic Party, Clinton’s sentiment on crypto resembles that of Senator and Democrat Elizabeth Warren, who has often criticized the crypto market during committee hearings.

Clinton’s comments came while discussing Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom she accused of being behind a campaign of disinformation and cyber warfare – apparently also referring to ransomware attacks and some of the payments. cryptographic data associated with them. While the former presidential candidate’s intentions are unknown, a prominent Democratic voice like Clinton’s further linking Russia to a seemingly apolitical financial tool like crypto could have the potential to hurt U.S. lawmakers trying to adopt. a policy on both sides of the aisle.

Party politics in the United States are sometimes comically confrontational. For example, many Republican voters destroyed their own possessions – Nike shoes and Keurig brewing machines, to name a few – after lawmakers spoke out against the former NFL quarterback. , Colin Kaepernick, who knelt during the US National Anthem. The whole debate around masks and vaccines in the United States is often presented not as a scientific question, but as a question of “freedom”, largely fueled by social media posts and doorstep statements. word conservatives.

Former President Bill Clinton spoke at the Ripple’s Swell conference in 2018 to say that blockchain’s “permutations and possibilities” were “incredibly good,” but he had been away for about 17 years to make those statements. When a more current Democratic figure like Hillary Clinton speaks out against crypto, could it affect how the issue is handled by current lawmakers?

Related: Is Ethereum on the left and Bitcoin on the right?

On November 15, President Joe Biden signed a $ 1 trillion infrastructure bill which also put in place stricter rules on businesses handling cryptocurrencies and expanded reporting requirements for brokers to include digital assets. While the passage of the bill by both houses of Congress was accomplished mostly along party lines – 69 to 30 votes in the Senate, 228 to 206 in the House – the language on cryptography was apparently more of a bipartisan issue.

Cynthia Lummis is a Republican senator who has also voted widely with her party on controversial issues, including against a commission to investigate the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol and not to impeach the former president – But even she takes the plunge when it comes to crypto. Lummis voted against the Senate infrastructure bill, and is currently job with Democratic Senator Ron Wyden to pass new legislation changing the tax reporting requirements of the law to not apply to certain people.

Related: Biparty Bill to Study Blockchain and Crypto Passes U.S. House of Representatives

Other efforts between Democratic and Republican lawmakers suggest common ground for now – at least when it comes to crypto and blockchain. Texas Democratic Party plans to pilot program aimed at raising funds for applicants and causes using non-fungible tokens, while the Republican National Committee of Congress and many party members candidates for state and federal positions presented donations in cryptocurrency.