Crypto lobbying spends $189 million: Can regulatory clarity be achieved?

历经多年游说，美国加密货币行业正积极推动《清晰法案》——一项旨在重塑加密货币市场结构立法的努力——而立法者们正在权衡来自倡导者和执法部门相互冲突的关切。

随着参议院谈判代表希望在国会八月休会前进行可能的全院表决，政治问题已从立法者是否关注数字资产论点，转变为该行业的选举季势头和财力资源是否足以推动法案通过终点线。

核心要点

《清晰法案》接近参议院潜在的全院表决，但剩余争议——特别是围绕第604条/《区块链监管确定性法案》——使结果仍不确定。

加密货币倡导者称其游说努力是“有史以来最成熟”的，结合了持续的立法者接触与以选举为中心的政治活动。

Public Citizen报告称，在2026年中期选举前，与加密货币相关的政治支出已达到1.89亿美元，将关于“购买影响力”与回应反加密货币政治的辩论置于台前。

主要执法团体正走向不同方向：美国主要县警长协会（MCSA）转向中立，而其他检察官和团体警告称，广泛的豁免可能削弱监督和问责。

Brogan Law的分析表明，虽然Fairshake支持的候选人在大多数已决胜负的竞选中获胜，但许多竞选并不像新闻标题所暗示的那样激烈，指向了更微妙的竞选策略效果。

《清晰法案》势头增强——但第604条仍是压力点

对于支持者而言，围绕《清晰法案》的辩论越来越像是在逐步缩小政治阻力。一个关键信号出现在7月3日，当时美国主要县警长协会（MCSA）表示，在围绕第604条（即《区块链监管确定性法案》）进行讨论后，它从反对该法案转为中立立场。

Coinbase首席执行官Brian Armstrong在X平台上将MCSA的这一进展描述为“巨大”，突显了随着立法者接近投票，该行业似乎多么看重执法相关机构的认可。

同一天，全国黑人执法行政人员组织（NOBLE）成为第一个支持该立法的主要执法机构。

尽管如此，该法案的道路仍然复杂。第604条/《区块链监管确定性法案》持续引发公共安全和监督倡导者的担忧。据与国际调查记者联盟（ICIJ）调查相关的报道称，6月下旬，四位其他检察官和代表总计7万名成员的执法团体向代理美国司法部长发出警告。他们的论点是：该法案的广泛豁免可能会在监督和问责方面造成漏洞，“老练的犯罪分子可能会利用这些漏洞”。

For investors and policy observers, the practical conclusion is that the Alliance for the Clarification Act is improving-but not yet solid. The legislation is now at a stage where minor wording differences and targeted exceptions can determine who supports it, who continues to oppose it, and ultimately whether the leadership can get the votes needed to pass.

Why the political operation of the cryptocurrency lobby triggers censorship

In addition to the legislative agenda, the political infrastructure of the cryptocurrency industry itself has become a major storyline. In an X-thread on June 25, Kristin Smith, director of the Solana Policy Institute and former CEO of the Blockchain Association, said that cryptocurrency advocacy was \"the most powerful and mature trend it has ever had.\" She cited bipartisan negotiations, ongoing meetings with lawmakers and what she called a successful campaign in support of \"advocates\" in Congress.

Public Citizen describes the effort in more controversial terms. In a report cited by Reuters, the consumer advocacy group said political spending on cryptocurrencies had reached $189 million before the 2026 midterm elections. The report suggests that industry spending is trying to influence elections and policy agendas, while critics see it as an attempt to buy votes and legitimacy.

Industry insiders reject this description. Colin McLaren, director of government relations at the Solana Policy Institute, told Cointelegraph that the infrastructure was not formed overnight and pointed to several groups including Fairshake, the Cedar Innovation Foundation, Stand With Crypto and the Blockchain Association as key contributors to moving pro-cryptocurrency legislation forward. McLaren believes these groups have helped build relationships within Congress and provided \"resources and cover\" for lawmakers so they can legislate without worrying about an electoral backlash.

Fairshake: Campaign spending and what it can actually change

No organization can illustrate the shift in cryptocurrency lobbying strategies more clearly than Fairshake. Fairshake is a cryptocurrency-backed super political action committee (PAC) funded by major industry players including Coinbase, Ripple and Andreessen Horowitz. Under Federal Election Commission rules, PAC raises and spends funds in accordance with federal election rules to support or oppose candidates and political causes.

During the 2026 U.S. Congressional primary cycle, Fairshake and its associated PAC reportedly spent tens of millions of dollars supporting candidates deemed friendly to digital assets and opposing candidates deemed hostile to the industry. Cointelegraph previously reported that in May, associated PACs spent more than $20 million to support Republican congressional primary candidates in Georgia, Alabama and Kentucky-some of that figure included more than $7 million in support of Rep. Andy Barr in the Kentucky Senate primary. The report also noted subsequent spending in the Democratic campaign, including millions of dollars in Maryland and New York.

McLaren believes this approach is having practical results. He told Cointelegraph that some candidates appeared to lag in polls before cryptocurrency-related ads were launched, but then won-adding that the industry seemed willing to take electoral risks rather than just support low-uncertainty outcomes.

But the analysis of Brogan Law reporter Veronica Irwin complicates the narrative of \"victory equals influence.\" In an analysis published June 30 in Brogan Law, it was reported that Irwin reviewed 40 win-win races in which Fairshake participated and compared Federal Election Commission filings with poll data and election results. The analysis found that Fairshake supported candidates won 38 of those races, but many races were already strongly leaning towards the eventual winner before the PAC intervened. Using her method, only 16 races seemed competitive enough that Fairshake\'s spending could change the outcome.

This leads to a key question that readers should be concerned about: Is Fairshake\'s greatest effect directly reversing the outcome of a close election-or is it shaping expectations among politicians and voters so that being seen as crypto-friendly carries less political risk?

Legislation still relies on coalitions, not just advertising

Even if campaign spending can help candidates win office, pushing a market-structure bill through Congress usually requires more than winning elections. Progress on the Clarification Act reflects months of negotiations involving lawmakers, industry participants and external stakeholders.

As MCSA shifts to neutrality rather than continued opposition, the message appears to be that coalition building remains crucial-especially on issues involving financial crime concerns, consumer protection and law enforcement roles. This pattern is evident in the way Section 604 has become the focus: Even groups that have shifted to neutrality may want to ensure accountability mechanisms are not weakened.

Ron Tarter, founder and former lawyer of RockWallet, told Cointelegraph that adoption is the foundation, lobbying translates adoption into policy participation, and campaign spending acts as an accelerator. In his view, political strategy works because it combines different forms of pressure and influence, rather than relying on just a single tool.

Irwin also hinted that the political advantage of cryptocurrencies does not just come from advertising budgets. She told Cointelegraph that for many voters, cryptocurrency is not among the \"top five issues.\" This creates what she calls a \"sweet spot\" where politicians can adopt a more pro-cryptocurrency stance with limited negative impact, and lobbying and campaign support can make the shift more lasting.

McLaren proposed a final framework: the industry was \"on the defensive for years\" and then decided to get involved more directly at the ballot box and create an agency designed to advocate for regulatory certainty.

As Senate negotiators move towards potential full-court action, the industry may focus on consolidating alliances around remaining disputes, particularly over Section 604, while opponents continue to press for guarantees of oversight and accountability. The next milestone to watch for is how quickly the bill\'s support among skeptics can expand once drafting issues are fully resolved, or whether these concerns will ultimately narrow the path to the votes needed to pass.