Authored by Nikolaus Hoffman via BitcoinMagazine.com,
If you were tuned into the Massachusetts Senate debate last night, you would have noticed a key exchange between pro-Bitcoin candidate John Deaton and his rival Elizabeth Warren, leader of Washington D.C.’s “anti-crypto army.”
When pressed by Deaton, Warren wouldn’t even defend herself.
After lying and attacking our industry for years, she said “I’m fine if people want to buy and sell crypto.”
Seriously...
Crypto took up a large portion of the wide-ranging debate, with Warren claiming Deaton would be beholden to the crypto industry that has backed him in the race.
“If John Deaton has a chance to go to Washington, his crypto buddies are going to want a return on their investment. He's going to be there to fight for crypto,” Warren said during the debate, suggesting he’d prioritize the industry’s interests over working-class Americans.
“I've upset more crypto billionaires than anyone did,” Deaton replied, claiming to have done Warren’s job by exposing regulatory capture in the crypto space during her time on the banking committee.
“But here's the thing, her bill bans bitcoin self-custody in America, yet she's allowing the banks to custody bitcoin — another example that Senator Warren's policies do not help poor people, they do not help the working class.”
Warren again questioned his connections to the crypto industry, however.
“He's saying he has really made crypto folks mad, so mad that they came here to Massachusetts and are funding 90% of his campaign to try to take back this Senate seat to take it away from me.”
Deaton responded by questioning why the Senator was so focused on crypto.
“I wish Senator Warren would attack inflation the way she attacks crypto. I wish she would attack securing the border the way she's focused on crypto,” he said.
My big concern with this moment is that it says everything about the Democrats and the lip service they are paying to the Bitcoin industry.
It’s undeniable that Bitcoin has turned into a partisan issue in this country for the most part. Most Democrats have followed Warren in taking a strong stance against supporting Bitcoin (even if they won’t admit it). I suspect Presidential candidate Kamala Harris has done the same.
Case in point, even Harris this week issued a generic “we will support blockchain and digital assets,” while not specifying exactly what she would do to help it.
But oh wait, she actually did put forth a new policy proposal yesterday, and to no one's surprise, it was a race based one that excludes most Americans.
It was a flop in the industry.
I have to ask at this point, how much more do pro-Democrat Bitcoiners need to see?
The Republicans have clearly embraced the industry. They’ve put forth legislation proposals in an attempt to foster more innovation in the space. They defend the industry from attacks coming from the Democrats. They attend Bitcoin conferences and events, listen to industry leaders, and buy and hold bitcoin personally.
They have not been shy in their public support for Bitcoin, and have also actively made it an official part of their party platform. That’s how serious they are.
The current leading presidential candidate, Donald Trump, has made many pledges to support and grow the industry, proposing specific policy on what he would enact if elected.
Earlier this summer, Trump raised $25 million from private individual donors at the Bitcoin 2024 Conference in Nashville (his second highest fundraiser across his three campaigns). American Bitcoin miners have met with Trump in Mar-A-Lago to discuss what they need him to do as president to support their businesses.
Where Republicans have leaned into Bitcoin, we have seen the opposite with Democrats. At almost every single congressional and Senate hearing I watch, Democrats vote against favorable Bitcoin regulation, and make verbal attacks on the industry.
At a congressional hearing only four months ago, Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters actually tried to make the case that we should implement a CBDC, and not ban it, because countries like China are embracing it. She called it the next “space race”.
It is crystal clear to anyone watching these congressional and senate hearings which side the Democrats have chosen when it comes to Bitcoin vs CBDC.
This is my big fear.
If elected president, I believe Harris would have little reason to support the industry, and every reason to continue attacking it, as she’s done as vice president over the last four years.
This election is a fierce battle for power of the United States of America. People and industries and choosing their sides, and if Kamala wins, she might not be so nice to the industries who heavily tried to get her opponent elected president.
If Bitcoiners want to see this industry not get attacked like it has these past four years, and see it thrive over the next four years, they need to make their voices heard at the ballot box this November – and, like it or not, they need to vote Republican.