After Senate Democrats blocked legislation backed by cryptocurrency groups in September, the industry’s major super PAC network reiterated plans to remain a bipartisan group supporting pro-crypto candidates on both sides of the aisle.
They’ve mostly failed.
Federal Election Commission filings show that the crypto industry’s main political action committee, Fairshake, spent on behalf of parties about equally since Sept. 1. The super PAC spread more than $3 million among Democratic Reps. Janelle Bynum of Oregon, Steven Horsford of Nevada and Derek Tran of California, with a similar amount going to Republican Reps. French Hill of Arkansas, Bill Huizenga of Michigan and Bryan Steil of Wisconsin.
But when it comes to broader spending by its network, Fairshake has overwhelmingly helped Republicans. In fact, since that failed vote on Sept. 15, Fairshake has transferred money only to its campaign affiliate that helps the GOP, while delivering no new funds to its linked group backing Democrats, according to data available through Oct. 14.
Trending
The Fairshake PAC, whose major contributors include Coinbase, Ripple and Andreessen Horowitz, transferred $69 million to the Republican-focused affiliate, Defend American Jobs. It did not move any money to its Democratic affiliate, Protect Progress, between Sept. 1 and Oct. 14, FEC filings show.
Defend American Jobs has deployed around $66 million this fall to prop up incumbent senators who supported the CLARITY Act, with the vast majority — more than $55 million — going to support Ohio Republican Sen. Jon Husted and defeat former Sen. Sherrod Brown, a crypto nemesis whom the industry helped boot from office in 2024.
Protect Progress was transferred no new funding from Fairshake, but it did spend $2.5 million to boost Democratic House candidates, primarily incumbents, among them Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, ranking Budget Committee member Brendan Boyle and California Rep. Jimmy Panetta.
Colin McLaren, the head of government relations at the crypto advocacy organization Solana Policy Institute, said this fall’s crypto investment has been the industry’s reaction to the halted bill.
“The opportunity that was presented back in September was a real opportunity for incumbents that may have been in tough races to demonstrate their position on the issue,” McLaren said. “At the end of the day, when you look at the map and you look at how votes fell, you can see how groups like Fairshake interpreted it really clearly.”
The spending against Brown recalls his previous Senate run, when the industry spent $40 million to oust the crypto critic from his seat and his role as the Senate Banking Committee chair.
The Fairshake-affiliated group also waded into a new Senate race in deep-red Nebraska in October. Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts, who supported the industry-backed bill, is facing a tough challenge from independent candidate Dan Osborn, whom the crypto network has spent more than $11 million opposing.
Every Senate Democrat opposed the vote to advance the CLARITY Act, citing ethics concerns related to President Donald Trump. The vote called into question the industry’s support for Democratic senators such as Ruben Gallego of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, for example, who each received $10 million from the industry during their 2024 campaigns.
McLaren said the electoral map influenced where crypto groups directed their spending this year. He pointed to the fact that Gallego, Slotkin and other pro-crypto Democrats like Sens. Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who helped negotiate the CLARITY Act, are not on the ballot this year.
“There really are some fantastic pro-crypto Democratic senators,” McLaren said. “Sadly, those senators aren’t in any sort of battleground seats right now … The direction is forward, and those relationships need to keep being built.”
McLaren said that the industry has maintained its promise to support lawmakers in both parties who are supportive of the industry. The CLARITY Act passed the House on a bipartisan basis more than a year ago, with 78 Democrats joining Republicans to advance the measure.
Still, data from OpenSecrets indicates that the crypto industry is undergoing a longer-term shift by party. In 2022, crypto-affiliated political spending groups actually favored Democrats, spending $28 million for Democratic candidates and $2 million against Republicans while shelling out just $16 million for Republicans and $1 million against Democrats.
Those groups reversed course in 2024, spending $48 million for Democrats and $1.5 million against Republicans while funding $69 million for Republicans and $13 million against Democrats. The partisan gulf widened sharply this year –– in 2026, crypto-affiliated groups spent just $31 million for Democrats and nothing against Republicans while spending $82 million for Republicans and $40 million against Democrats, according to the OpenSecrets data.
“In the 2022 cycle, the first one where they were really active, they actually spent more for Democrats than for Republicans,” Andrew Mayersohn, who researches committee spending at OpenSecrets, said. “Whereas this cycle, they’ve spent more than twice as much for Republicans as for Democrats.”
McLaren said that shift isn’t surprising to him since Republicans have historically been more supportive of the industry’s growth. But, he added, crypto groups want to maintain relationships on both sides of the aisle while control of the next Congress and the party of the next president remains to be seen.
“It’s understandable that there might be a slight bend towards Republican incumbents, particularly given the fact that that has traditionally been the standard-bearer for the industry on these issues, but we are open for that to change,” McLaren said. “We want this to be a nonpartisan issue, not a right or left issue.”
Author
