Stand With Crypto has endorsed 32 candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives ahead of the next midterm cycle, placing digital-asset policy more visibly into congressional campaign messaging as lawmakers prepare to revisit a federal market-structure bill in September.
The advocacy organization’s Monday announcement included support for Republican Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio and Democratic Representative Ritchie Torres of New York, two lawmakers who have become prominent congressional voices on cryptocurrency legislation. Stand With Crypto said it will disclose its Senate endorsements closer to Election Day.
The endorsement list gives the group a larger role in House contests where the fate of crypto legislation could hinge on a relatively small number of votes. It also places candidates from both parties under a common policy banner, reflecting the industry’s effort to build support around issues such as market oversight, stablecoin rules and the treatment of digital assets under federal law.
Bipartisan endorsements focus on congressional control
Davidson has been one of the Republican Party’s most active advocates for clearer cryptocurrency rules and has supported legislation intended to define the responsibilities of the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Torres, a Democrat representing a Bronx district, has frequently argued that regulatory ambiguity can push crypto activity outside the United States and has pressed agencies to explain their approach to enforcement.
Stand With Crypto did not present the endorsements as support for a single bill. Its voter hub grades lawmakers according to their positions on digital-asset policy, giving the group a public tool for connecting legislative records with campaign choices.
The group had previously endorsed six bipartisan candidates ahead of November races. Expanding that effort to 32 House candidates suggests it is moving beyond individual high-profile contests and toward a more systematic attempt to influence the makeup of the next Congress.
That approach mirrors the political activity seen during the 2024 cycle, when crypto-focused super PACs became major participants in selected races. Fairshake, a super PAC supported by cryptocurrency companies and executives, spent $12 million in Ohio during the 2024 campaign to support Republican Bernie Moreno, who defeated Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown.
Political fundraising linked to crypto policy has since resumed in Ohio. Spending began in April to support Republican Senator Jon Husted ahead of his November contest against Brown, according to the information provided in the campaign update.
Senate vote approaches amid unresolved disputes
The House endorsements arrive less than a month before a scheduled September 15 procedural vote tied to the Clarity Act, a proposal aimed at creating a federal framework for crypto-market regulation.
The bill would seek to draw clearer boundaries between the SEC and CFTC, a longstanding industry priority. Crypto companies have argued that overlapping or uncertain agency authority has made it difficult to determine which assets and activities fall under securities law, commodities regulation or other financial rules.
Stand With Crypto has tracked lawmakers’ positions on the measure through its voter hub, adding a direct legislative benchmark to its campaign activity. The scheduled procedural vote would test whether the bill can clear the 60-vote threshold generally required to advance major legislation in the Senate.
As of Monday, the measure did not appear to have the votes needed to proceed. Negotiations have been complicated by disagreements over stablecoin rewards, illicit-finance safeguards and ethics concerns connected to President Donald Trump’s crypto-related business interests.
Stablecoin rewards have become a particular point of friction because they sit close to the line between payment products and interest-bearing financial accounts. Opponents have raised concerns that reward programs could allow stablecoin issuers or platforms to compete with banks without operating under equivalent rules. Supporters have argued that overly broad restrictions could limit consumer choice and favor established financial institutions.
Trump’s crypto interests have become part of the debate
Ethics questions surrounding Trump’s cryptocurrency businesses have become intertwined with the legislative discussion. His crypto-related wealth has been described as reaching hundreds of millions of dollars through ventures connected to World Liberty Financial and an official memecoin.
In July, Trump agreed to an ethics provision that would bar public officials and their spouses from issuing or sponsoring digital assets, though enforcement would be limited to the Justice Department. A separate bipartisan proposal from Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego of Arizona and Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina would extend enforcement authority to state attorneys general. The proposal had not received Trump’s approval at the time of the report.
Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, a lead negotiator on the market-structure bill, called Sunday for an ethics provision to be included in the final legislation. Gillibrand cited a Reuters and Ipsos poll finding that 63% of Americans considered Trump’s crypto profits inappropriate.
The dispute creates a difficult legislative calculation. A market-structure framework needs support from senators who want clearer rules for digital assets, while the bill’s political viability may depend on whether it addresses concerns over conflicts of interest and enforcement.
Campaign groups are linking policy records to elections
Stand With Crypto’s 32 House endorsements do not determine whether the Clarity Act advances, but they give the policy fight an electoral dimension before Senate negotiations resume. Candidates who support clearer federal rules can now point to an organized constituency focused on crypto legislation, while critics may face more pressure to define their positions on regulation rather than treating the sector as a niche issue.
The group’s decision to delay Senate endorsements also leaves room for upcoming votes to shape its choices. If the September procedural vote becomes a defining test, senators’ positions on the Clarity Act could become a practical campaign issue in races where crypto-focused political organizations are prepared to spend.
For Congress, the immediate question is whether negotiators can narrow the gaps on stablecoin treatment, illicit-finance provisions and ethics safeguards before the bill reaches the Senate floor. For candidates, the endorsement campaign makes those negotiations part of the electoral record well before voters cast their ballots.
Curious how U.S. politics shapes your portfolio? Explore the possible future of crypto regulation in the US and stay ahead.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
