Washington D.C. is suddenly awash in crypto lobbyists. It’s a bit like a gold rush, only instead of picks and shovels, everyone’s carrying a white paper and a hefty checkbook. A dozen groups, give or take, are now vying to shape how the U.S. government views digital assets. Some overlap so much it’s hard to tell where one ends and another begins. It’s…a lot.
- The crypto industry is experiencing a surge in lobbying efforts in Washington D.C., with numerous groups competing to influence government regulations on digital assets. This influx of lobbyists highlights the growing importance of the crypto industry and its desire to shape favorable policies.
- Despite a general consensus on high-level goals, the crowded field of lobbyists faces challenges such as duplication of effort, competition for funding, and leadership churn, potentially hindering their collective impact. The industry is also seeing firms set up their own D.C. offices, pushing their own agendas.
- Some crypto companies are adopting alternative strategies, such as grassroots campaigns and PACs, to directly engage voters and support crypto-friendly lawmakers, reflecting a multifaceted approach to influencing policy. Despite the competition, there is some cooperation between groups.
The Digital Chamber, the Blockchain Association, the Crypto Council for Innovation – these are the established players. But new faces keep popping up. Miller Whitehouse-Levine just launched the Solana Policy Institute, and the National Cryptocurrency Association arrived with a $50 million splash courtesy of Ripple. It’s a crowded field, and frankly, a little chaotic. Everyone wants a piece of the action, and the timing feels right. Congress is actually *listening*, and there’s a surprising amount of bipartisan interest.
Too Many Voices?
Most of the lobbyists themselves say more voices are a good thing. “We need all the help we can get,” Whitehouse-Levine told CoinDesk. There’s a mountain of legislation to tackle – stablecoins, illicit finance, proof of reserves, even a government-backed digital dollar. But privately, some veterans are starting to worry. Is this a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth? It’s hard to get attention when everyone’s shouting at once, especially when you’re competing for the ear of already-overworked congressional staff.
The problem isn’t just duplication of effort; it’s also funding. These groups need money to operate, and they’re all fishing from the same pool of donors. Big crypto firms are also setting up their own D.C. offices, pushing their own agendas. It’s a bit like a game of political whack-a-mole. You think you’ve made progress on one issue, and then another group pops up with a slightly different angle. It’s exhausting, even for the lobbyists.
And the leadership churn? It’s dizzying. Cody Carbone is the new head of the Digital Chamber, but he’s just one in a long line of recent arrivals. Sheila Warren stepped down from CCI, Kristin Smith left the Blockchain Association for Whitehouse-Levine’s Solana Institute, and even the founder of Coin Center decided to move on. It’s like a revolving door, and it makes it hard to build any real momentum.
But hey, at least there’s enthusiasm. Carbone thinks a crowded field is fine, for now. “At some point, there could be too many cooks in the kitchen,” he admits, “But I think that’s a problem for a later day.” It’s a sentiment echoed by Amanda Tuminelli, who took over at the DeFi Education Fund. “When we work together, we actually accomplish great outcomes,” she says. Like killing that IRS rule on DeFi. Small victories, but victories nonetheless.
Coinbase, meanwhile, is taking a different approach. They’ve launched “Stand With Crypto,” a grassroots campaign aimed at mobilizing everyday investors. They’re also backing the Fairshake PAC, which spent over $100 million last year to elect crypto-friendly lawmakers. It’s a direct appeal to voters, and it’s working. The industry is seeing bipartisan support in Congress, which is a rare and welcome sight.
The groups have been cooperating, at least to some extent. They’ve signed joint letters, hosted events, and published papers together. But ultimately, they’re all competing for resources and influence. It’s a messy, complicated process, but it’s also a sign that the crypto industry is finally taking itself seriously. Whether that seriousness translates into meaningful regulation remains to be seen. It’s a bit like watching a toddler try to build a skyscraper out of blocks. It might collapse, but at least they’re trying.
The lobbyists and advocates routinely come together on letters, events and papers pushing their common aims. Carbone said there’s “definitely friendliness and conversations between us,” though he said there “needs to be more collaboration.”
