Harris, Trump shouldn't pander to crypto crowd
By the Bloomberg Opinion Editorial Board
The good news is that business interests are getting support during an election year. The bad news is that the business is crypto.
Less than two years after the industry’s highest-profile political donor was exposed as a criminal, the lure of campaign donations from the digital-money crowd is once again proving irresistible. Last time, Sam Bankman-Fried lavished cash on candidates in hopes of laxer regulations (before he ended up in federal prison on fraud charges). This time, crypto advocates are raising some millions to oppose unfriendly politicians. That’s led some candidates to abandon common sense in pursuit of cash.
Although the industry is good at grabbing headlines, the stakes aren’t especially high. Not even the most skeptical U.S. politicians are proposing to ban Bitcoin and other such currencies, as China and about 20 other countries have done. Instead, the debate has mostly focused on whether digital tokens should be regulated like other types of investment products. (They should be.)
President Biden’s administration has done a good job limiting the risks that crypto poses, including by taking legal action against several companies and individuals — Bankman-Fried among them — for violations of money-laundering requirements and securities laws. So far Vice President Kamala Harris hasn’t said whether her own approach would differ from Biden’s, but she’s under pressure to adopt a more lenient position. A policy adviser indicated this week that she wants to help the industry.
https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/comment-harris-trump-shouldnt-pander-to-crypto-crowd/
Trump panders to them for obvious reasons.
= new reply since forum marked as read
