https://www.citizen.org/article/big-crypto-big-spending-2024/
Start with PublicCitizen (reported by, among others, Axios) which teaches:
Key Findings
- In 2024, crypto corporations have poured over $119 million directly into influencing federal elections, primarily into a non-partisan super PAC dedicated to electing pro-crypto candidates and defeating crypto skeptics.
- Crypto corporations are by far the dominant corporate political spenders in 2024 as nearly half (44%) of all corporate money contributed during this year’s elections ($274 million so far) came from crypto backers.
- Koch Industries is a distant second place in 2024. The privately held conglomerate owned by Charles and, formerly, the late David Koch, contributed $25 million to its Koch-controlled Americans for Prosperity Action and $3.25 million toward electing Republicans to Congress.
- Direct corporate election spending at this scale is unprecedented. Crypto corporations’ total spending in the past three election cycles – $129 million – already amounts to 15% of all known corporate contributions since the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United, which total $884 million. 92% of the corporate crypto spending is from 2024.
- Since Citizens United, the crypto corporations are now second in total election-related spending, trailing only fossil fuel corporations, which have spent $176 million over the past 14 years, including $73 million from Koch Industries.
- The crypto sector’s Fairshake PAC and its affiliates have received nearly $114 million directly from corporate backers, far more than any other outside spender this cycle. Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity Action, a hybrid PAC, is a distant second, having received nearly $26 million, primarily from Koch Industries.
- Fairshake’s corporate backing is unprecedented. Though unlimited corporate contributions have been enabled since 2010 by Citizens United, this newcomer is already second only to the super PAC dedicated to electing Republicans to the U.S. Senate in terms of corporate money received. That super PAC, the Senate Leadership Fund, has received nearly $119 million directly from corporations over the past 14 years, largely from fossil fuel corporations but including many other sectors, including crypto, tobacco, and for-profit prisons.
Note: Findings are based on Public Citizen analysis of federal election data provided by OpenSecrets showing all contributions of $5,000 or more by for-profit corporations to super PACs and hybrid PACs between 2010 and June 30, 2024.
[formatting in original] The PubCit Intro:
Cryptocurrency corporations are spending big to make crypto regulation a top issue for candidates in the 2024 elections.
Crypto-sector corporations – primarily Coinbase and Ripple – have dumped over $119 million in real dollars into the 2024 elections so far, almost entirely into super PACs dedicated to elevating pro-crypto candidates and attacking crypto skeptics (see Table 1).
The primary beneficiary of the corporate crypto cash is Fairshake PAC, a super PAC that has raised $202.9 million. More than half of Fairshake’s funding – $107.9 million, or 53% – came directly from corporations that stand to profit from the PAC’s efforts, mostly Coinbase and Ripple. The rest of the PAC’s funds mostly comes from billionaire crypto executives and venture capitalists, including $44 million from the founders of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, $5 million from the Winklevoss twins, and $1 million from Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong.
This tsunami of corporate crypto cash is a brazen and unprecedented attempt by for-profit businesses to force their private, pecuniary priorities ahead of the public interest. “Money moves the needle,” Coinbase’s billionaire CEO Brian Armstrong told Axios. “For better or worse, that’s how our system works.”
For Americans hopeful the federal government will prioritize their interest in a stable economy and crack down on Ponzi-like schemes and scams, crypto’s corporate influence corrupting our political process can only be for worse.
Those are alarmist words, but what's the story behind the rhetoric? More:
Longstanding anti-“pay-to-play” laws prohibit corporations that have contracts with the federal government from contributing to electoral campaigns. (Public Citizen joined a complaint filed with the FEC alleging Coinbase’s $25 million contribution to Fairshake and $500,000 contribution to the Congressional Leadership Fund were made in violation of this law, as Coinbase is a federal contractor with the US Marshals service and the contributions were made when the corporation was legally prohibited from doing so.)
The decade after the Citizens United ruling led to a massive surge of contributions from super PACs. Contributions to super PACs were dominated by billionaires, with just 25 wealthy individuals contributing about $1.4 billion, over that period – nearly half of super PAC contributions. Direct corporate contributions totaled just $313 million between 2010 and 2020.
Crypto corporations’ total spending in the past three election cycles – $129 million – already amounts to 15% of all known corporate contributions since 2010, which now total $884 million. Direct corporate election spending at this scale is unprecedented (see Chart 1).
Crypto corporations are already second in total election-related spending, trailing only fossil fuel corporations, which have spent $176 million over the past 14 years, including $73 million from Koch Industries, a notoriously prolific corporate contributor to Americans for Prosperity, a particularly active backer of “Tea Party” Republicans during the Obama administration.
On the regulatory issue, WashingtonExaminer:
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), the chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, recently introduced a bill that would give the Commodity Futures Trading Commission an expanded role in overseeing digital assets. Bipartisan negotiations on the legislation on her panel broke down ahead of the August recess and after Sen. John Boozman (R-AR), the top Republican on the committee, noted he had concerns about the bill.
“The bottom line is that it was Republicans who blocked the crypto bill that Sen. Stabenow put together on the Ag committee, and we are going to have to figure out how to move forward from here,” Schumer said in response to a question from the Washington Examiner.
Some lawmakers and industry experts believe that a cryptocurrency bill could happen during the lame-duck period.
“I continue to work with both parties to make that happen, and I appreciate that I’ve even had the opportunity to make some comments on what’s going on in the AG committee with their legislation,” Lummis said. “I continue to approach this topic with hopes that during the lame duck, we’ll be able to get a comprehensive framework across the finish line.”
Others believe meaningful legislation may have to wait until the next Congress.
“The House made a ton of progress this year, this Senate did quite a bit of work on it this summer, but I think there’s a long ways to go to get the details done, and I think the next Congress is going to have a strong foundation on these issues,” Smith said.
Nevertheless, because of the legislation regarding cryptocurrency, Lummis told the Washington Examiner that she believes it’s a critical time for the industry to get involved in the election.
“They’re getting slapped with penalties and enforcement actions after they sought guidance on how to comply at the SEC,” Lummis said. “They did the best they could, and then the SEC penalized them and slapped them with enforcement actions, so now they have to pay lawyers to defend themselves at the SEC.”
“Their money could be better spent, not paying lawyers to defend them, but to support candidates who understand the asset class and want to see a statutory framework that creates clear rules of the road for how the industry can comply,” she added.
So, Ag Committee, we're more like soybeans than stocks and bonds, commodity vs. security, and we don't want no stinking SEC attention, no way.
Spend enough, you're recognized as a commodity. The Street:
Additionally, San Francisco-headquartered crypto firm Ripple has given $49 million to crypto PACs in the hopes of bringing about pro-crypto regulation. "I think as an industry, especially for us companies based in the U.S., we’re frustrated with how far the U.S. is lagging on setting rules," Ripple President Monica Long told Reuters recently. "This whole dynamic of setting rules through enforcement ... is really unproductive and not getting us anywhere."
After the landmark 2010 Citizens United decision, independent political spending on elections has mushroomed, and special interest groups – particularly pro-crypto groups – have taken advantage of super PACs in the hopes of helping elect pro-industry candidates. According to the D.C.-based watchdog group Open Secrets, independent spending on elections has grown significantly, in 2010 jumping to $4.5 billion from $750 million. This year alone, super PACs have collected over $102 million to support the crypto industry.
“Money moves the needle,” Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong told Axios. “For better or worse, that’s how our system works.”
Put another way, Spend enough, you're recognized as a commodity.
Put another way, yet again, You pay the piper, you call the tune (if you have an amenable piper).
And that is only one reason I vote against Emmer every chance I get, (he's my Rep. - it's where I live), and I do admit his holding the seat is an upgrade from his predecessor, Michel Bachmann.
Faint praise is really no praise at all.
And Emmer is prepping Vance to debate Walz. We'll see how that goes.
______________UPDATE_____________
CNBC has coverage. Two videos. and this:
No other sector is keeping up with crypto. That includes oil companies and banks, which have historically been big political contributors.
Since 2010, when the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling opened the door for limitless corporate money in U.S. elections, the crypto sector has accounted for 15% of all disclosed contributions, according to the report from Public Citizen. More than 90% of the corporate crypto cash that’s been raised was brought in this election cycle.
Rick Claypool, research director at Public Citizen, who authored the latest report, said the massive money poured in by crypto companies to “silence crypto’s critics and elevate its backers embodies everything that is wrong with the Supreme Court’s disastrous Citizens United decision.”
Claypool’s research shows that crypto corporations are second only to fossil fuel conglomerates in total election-related spending since the 2010 ruling.
Do recall, Donald Trump gave the keynote address when Crypto folks convened, and the entire Trump family [absent Melinia and Ivanka/Jarad] is promoting some of that shit. Right up there with Trump Steaks, Trump Vodka, Trump University.
Walking the Crypto side of the Street, and then some, but not a security. Just an investment, there should be some in everybody's portfolio. Like corn, soybeans. You get the drift.
FURTHER: When Walz debates Vance, might crypto be a topic, or will it be sotto voce? That which we will not name. Like Yahweh. Name the name at your peril. And sure as hell is real, don't regulate. Too much clout for that. The Donald knows.