Is US politics divisive enough to make crypto a partisan issue?

As the perceived legitimacy of blockchain technology grows, politicians in the United States have shown a growing interest in making non-partisan technology a politically divisive issue.

Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said in an online video on Friday in front of an audience at the Bloomberg New Economic Forum in Singapore that while cryptocurrencies are an “exciting” technology, they also have power. Strength weakens the US dollar and destabilizes countries – “likely”. starting with the little one, but it gets a lot bigger. Although Clinton is no longer the chairman of the Democratic Party, Clinton’s views on cryptocurrencies are similar to those of top Democrat and Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has often criticized the crypto market in recent sessions.

Clinton’s comments came while speaking about Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom she accused of being behind a campaign of disinformation and cyber warfare – which also appeared to relate to ransomware attacks and some related cryptocurrency payments. While the former presidential candidate’s intentions are unknown, a prominent Democratic voice like Clinton continues to associate Russia with a seemingly apolitical financial tool like cryptocurrency that could potentially harm US lawmakers trying to make politics on both sides of the aisle.

Political parties in the United States are sometimes humorously divisive. For example, many Republican voters destroyed their own possessions – Nike shoes and Keurig brewing machines – after lawmakers spoke out against former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who knelt during the national anthem. The entire discussion of masks and vaccines in the US is often phrased not as a scientific topic, but as one of “liberal” topics, largely brought to the fore through posts and social media statements by conservatives.

Former Monthly President Bill Clinton spoke at Ripple’s Swell Conference in 2018 to say that the “permutations and possibilities” of blockchain are “incredibly amazing,” but he’s been out of office for about 17 years when making such statements power. If a current Democratic Party personality like Hillary Clinton speaks out against crypto, could it affect the way current lawmakers deal with the matter?

Related: Ethereum on the left and Bitcoin on the right?

On November 15, President Joe Biden signed a $ 1 trillion infrastructure bill. Although the passage of the bill by both houses of Congress was largely done by party lines – 69-30 votes in the Senate, 228-206 votes in the House of Representatives – the language of electric death appears to be more of a bipartisan issue.

Cynthia Lummis is a Republican senator who has also largely voted with her party on controversial issues, including against the committee investigating the January 6 attacks on the US Capitol that happened with crypto. Lummis voted against the infrastructure draft in the Senate and is current work with Democratic Senator Ron Wyden to pass a new law that changes the law’s tax reporting requirements so that they do not apply to certain individuals.

https://twitter.com/SenLummis/status/1425590730500808713?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener
Related: Non-partisan law on research into blockchain and cryptocurrencies passed in the US House of Representatives

Other efforts between Democratic and Republican lawmakers are currently showing similarities – at least when it comes to crypto and blockchain. The Texas Democrats are planning to pilot a program that aims to raise funds for candidates and causes using non-rechargeable tokens, while the Republican Congressional Committee National and several party candidates have introduced cryptocurrency donations to federal and state offices.

Follow the Youtube Channel | Subscribe to telegram channel | Follow the Facebook page