Last month at the New York Times DealBook Summit, political analyst and media personality Van Jones admitted that the Democrats made a fatal mistake in not only largely disregarding the crypto voter but in acting against them during the last election cycle and more broadly during President Biden's time in office. '50 million people bought some crypto - that's a bet on [the] future,' said Jones. They're trying to get to a better future. Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren beating the hell out of crypto was not smart.
Jones is one of the first prominent Democrats to publicly admit post election that the Democrats should have invited those who hold bitcoin and crypto into the party instead of pushing them away. The questions now are Will other well-known Democrats follow Jones's lead? and What would their policy proposals look like if they did? The latter question is particularly important because while Democrats may begin to say they're 'pro-crypto,' the devil is in the details.
For example, when I interviewed former Congressman Wiley Nickel (D-NC), one of the few outspoken bitcoin and crypto proponents in the Democratic party last year, I asked him if he'd support the right for bitcoin and crypto owners to hold their private keys. His response: 'In Congress, we've really focused on doing a few things before we get into the next level of stuff. It's about regulating the industry, FIT21, the digital assets market structure bill and stablecoins.'
The right to hold one's private keys is the 'first level of stuff' in my book, and his lack of a direct response to my question worried me, especially when juxtaposed with what Trump said on the matter at the Libertarian conference.
Collection
[
|
...
]