Does the US Still Care About Crypto?
Crypto spent roughly $176 million on the 2026 midterms, yet voter surveys suggest digital assets remain a low priority. As Democrats take control of Congress, the industry’s political influence and institutional adoption are moving in different directions.
In the November 3 US midterm elections, the Democratic Party won control of both chambers of Congress, the House of Representatives and the Senate, ending two years of Republican control. When the new Congress takes office in January 2027, Republican President Donald Trump will face a Democratic-controlled legislature for the remaining two years of his term.
The results come two years after Trump pledged to make the United States the “crypto capital of the planet,” positioning himself as the industry's political champion during the 2024 presidential election.
As of late October, cryptocurrency industry groups had spent approximately $176 million across more than 100 US midterm races during the 2026 election cycle, according to a Reuters review. The spending continued a major political effort that began during the 2024 election cycle. Yet polling suggests digital assets remained a low priority for American voters, even as financial institutions such as Visa continued expanding their blockchain-based infrastructure.
Does the US still care about crypto?
From Gensler to Trump: What Changed?
During President Joe Biden's administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), led by Chair Gary Gensler, subjected the cryptocurrency industry to extensive regulatory scrutiny. In a July 27, 2023 interview with Bloomberg Television, Gensler warned:
“This is a field rife with fraud, rife with hucksters.”
While he also acknowledged good faith actors in the space, Gensler's concerns centered on fraud, investor protection, and compliance with existing securities laws. By contrast, the Trump administration adopted a markedly different approach, promoting the industry and shifting away from enforcement-led regulation.
In March 2025, Trump established a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve by executive order, initially funded with bitcoin forfeited in criminal or civil proceedings rather than taxpayer-funded purchases. Four months later, he signed the GENIUS Act, establishing a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins in the US.
However, broader legislation remains unfinished. The CLARITY Act, which would establish digital-asset market rules and divide regulatory responsibilities between the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), was passed in the US House of Representatives in July 2025, but failed to advance in the Senate in September 2026. A procedural vote fell short of the 60 votes required to advance, with 49 senators voting in favor and 50 against.
While federal cryptocurrency policy has shifted considerably, whether those changes have translated into broader public support remains unclear.
Political Spending, Public Priorities
Despite the industry's substantial political spending, cryptocurrency appears to remain a relatively minor concern for American voters.
An April 2026 survey of 1,000 registered voters, commissioned by CoinDesk, found that just 1% of respondents identified cryptocurrency as their top electoral concern. However, 73% opposed senior government officials holding personal business interests in cryptocurrency.
Similarly, a September Ipsos survey of US adults, commissioned by the DeFi Education Fund, found that only 13% considered it very or extremely important for a candidate to encourage growth in blockchain, cryptocurrency and decentralized finance (DeFi).
The disconnect was particularly visible in the US state of Ohio. In 2024, crypto-backed groups spent more than $40 million opposing Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, who lost his reelection bid. Two years later, Brown ran for Ohio's other Senate seat in a special election. According to CoinDesk, the crypto-backed super PAC Fairshake and the Winklevoss-backed Digital Freedom Fund spent approximately $63 million opposing Brown in the 2026 election. Despite that spending, Brown won.
However, election outcomes alone cannot establish whether voters support or oppose cryptocurrency. Political campaigns involve numerous competing issues, and the industry's preferred candidates are not necessarily running on cryptocurrency policy.
The distinction is important. Substantial political spending may increase an industry's influence in Washington without making cryptocurrency a priority for the broader electorate.
Beyond the Political Spotlight
The election results introduce new uncertainty for cryptocurrency legislation in Washington, but the industry's development continues.
Crypto may be leaving the stage and going to work behind the curtain. Visa reported a $25 billion annualized stablecoin settlement run rate during its October earnings call, ten times the previous year's level.
During his closing remarks at the Federal Reserve’s Payments Innovation Conference on October 21, 2025, Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller addressed the distinction between consumer awareness and financial infrastructure:
“Consumers don't care about the technology underlying things.”
This complicates the question of whether Americans still care about cryptocurrency. Public enthusiasm appears limited as a political force, while institutional adoption continues through services consumers may use without directly interacting with digital assets.
Perhaps cryptocurrency's future doesn't depend on whether Americans care about it.
Sources
Enjoyed reading this article?
More articles like thisComments
No comments yet!