Crypto Lobbying Reaches New Heights in the U.S., But Is There a Risk of Over-Saturation?

The crypto industry's moment in Washington, D.C. has arrived, and companies are seizing the opportunity to make their voices heard. However, as new organizations emerge and leadership shifts occur within top advocacy groups, the field of pro-crypto advocates is becoming more congested than ever. At least a dozen groups, including the Digital Chamber, Blockchain Association, and Crypto Council for Innovation, are vying to shape digital assets policies in the U.S., with some overlapping in membership, funding, and objectives. Many leaders of these groups believe that the more, the merrier, and that the influx of advocacy groups will help push for favorable policy from the administration and Congress. According to Miller Whitehouse-Levine, who recently launched the new Solana Policy Institute, 'Many of the objectives are consistent across these groups. That's a good thing, because I think there's an absolute torrent of legislative and regulatory work that's going on right now, and we need all the help we could get.' Congress is currently pursuing several crypto bills, including legislation to set boundaries for crypto markets, oversee stablecoin issuers, and curtail digital assets in illicit financing. While some current and former policy advocates acknowledge that the field is becoming crowded, making it challenging to justify the existence of multiple entities pushing for the same cause, others believe that the diversity of groups is a net positive. New organizations, such as the National Cryptocurrency Association, have recently emerged, further increasing the ranks of pro-crypto advocates. The growth of these groups is often driven by companies or lobbyists who feel that their specific interests are not being represented and can secure funding to support their causes. The crowded field of U.S. crypto groups has led to a shuffle in leadership, with many organizations losing or swapping leaders in recent months. Cody Carbone, the new leader of the Digital Chamber, believes that the influx of advocacy groups is a positive development, stating, 'At some point, there could be too many cooks in the kitchen, but I think that's a problem for a later day.' Sheila Warren, who recently stepped down as the chief of the Crypto Council for Innovation, emphasized the importance of a united front, saying, 'I think it's really about coming together and recognizing that we all pretty much want the same things.' Not all groups share the same agendas, with some focusing on narrow areas of the industry and others oriented towards research or serving crypto users. The ranks of pro-crypto groups include the Coin Center, Satoshi Action Fund, Bitcoin Policy Institute, Government Blockchain Association, and Bitcoin Mining Council. Ripple's new National Cryptocurrency Association, backed by a $50 million commitment, aims to focus on the interests of crypto users and investors rather than industry players. The industry, particularly U.S. exchange Coinbase, has also entered the political arena, with the establishment of the Stand With Crypto movement and the well-funded political action committee Fairshake. The crypto lobbying space is entering a new chapter, tackling major questions on tax, government crypto reserves, market structure, and stablecoin regulations. As the industry navigates this transition, the sudden and dramatic shuffle in leadership has added to the complexity of the landscape. Kristin Smith, the former chief of the Blockchain Association, has left to join the new Solana organization, while the founder of the Digital Chamber, Perianne Boring, has exited her role to focus on unpaid work leading the board. The founder of the crypto think tank Coin Center has also departed. Ji Kim, the new leader of the Crypto Council for Innovation, remains 'laser-focused on ensuring that CCI continues to be the leading, substantive, and global voice for our members on key policy issues.' Despite the potential for mergers, the groups have practical needs for funding and members, driving them to secure members who can only afford to join one or two organizations. Carbone acknowledged that there is a competitiveness angle to the landscape, stating, 'It would be naive to say there's not, so there's a race sometimes.' However, the lobbyists and advocates have come together on letters, events, and papers pushing their common aims, and Carbone believes that there needs to be more collaboration.