The 2024 presidential election in the United States is, without question, the country's first ‘crypto’ election.
We have the first major party platform to include crypto. We have both candidates featured in high-profile crypto events. We have both candidates speaking publicly about crypto and financial innovation.
Not coincidentally, both candidates will also accept bitcoin donations (directly or indirectly through political action committees).
But a reality check is needed on the presidential candidates' interest in crypto.
Bitcoin donations are a fundraising tool, not a policy statement.
The reality of politics is that we’re a long way from being able to draw a straight line from statements made on the campaign trail to concrete and substantive policies that would have a positive impact on the crypto sector.
For the next president—whoever it is—crypto issues will be competing for attention with many other issues, such as taxes, the budget, the border, immigration, and geopolitical conflict.
In addition, regardless of the presidential administration, the impact that a president alone can have on crypto policy is not limitless. That’s why the congressional election should also be watched to understand how changes in crypto regulation may play out.
Some of Congress’s leaders on crypto issues are retiring, including Representative McHenry and Senator Stabenow. While there are others, who are likely to remain in Congress, such as Representative Emmer and Senators Lummis and Gillibrand, it is unclear if new crypto leadership will emerge.
Perhaps more importantly, control of both chambers of Congress will determine whether crypto policy and regulation comes up for a vote. And the dynamic between the new president and the 119th Congress will be an important factor in whether any new crypto legislation is signed into law.
For example, a Congress controlled by the same party as the president will be able to pass new crypto-related laws that reflect their views on how crypto should be regulated. If Congress is controlled by a different party than the president, the probability is greatly reduced for both parties to reach a compromise on crypto legislation.
At the same time, in any of these situations, it is unclear whether crypto legislation would be high on the list of priorities for either party.
[View source.]
