
Democrats are drawing closer to the crypto industry despite Trump divisions
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump builds a crypto empire — including hosting a private dinner with top investors at his golf club — Democrats have united in condemning what they call blatant corruption from the White House.
But the Democratic Party's own relationship with the emerging crypto industry is far less cut and dried.
Work in the Republican-led Senate to legitimize cryptocurrency by adding guardrails has drawn backing from some Democrats, underscoring growing support for the industry in the party. But divisions have opened over the bill, with many demanding it prevent the Republican president and his family from directly profiting from cryptocurrency.
'I'm all on board with the idea of regulating crypto,' said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. 'But at this moment, when cryptocurrency is being so clearly used by Donald Trump to facilitate his corruption, I don't think you can close your eyes to that when you're legislating.'
The legislation is moving ahead more rapidly than Congress usually acts when an industry is new. But the big money and campaign donations flowing from cryptocurrency firms have made them a new powerhouse on the political scene, one that's increasingly gaining allies and capturing the attention of lawmakers.
A look at what to know about the industry's clout and the political fight over what's known as the GENIUS Act:
'Anti-crypto is a good way to end your career'
To understand the growing clout of the crypto industry, look no further than the 2024 election. Fairshake, a crypto super political action committee, and its affiliated PACs spent more than $130 million in congressional races.
Fairshake spent roughly $40 million supporting Republican Bernie Moreno in Ohio in an effort to defeat Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown. Brown, who lost to Moreno by more than 3 percentage points, was seen as a chief critic of the industry as the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.
'DC received a clear message that being anti-crypto is a good way to end your career, as it doesn't represent the will of the voters,' Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, wrote in a social media post the day after the 2024 election.
Coinbase — the largest crypto exchange in the U.S. and biggest contributor to Fairshake — does not view support for its industry as partisan, according to Kara Calvert, the company's vice president of U.S. policy. The industry also spent heavily to support Democrats Ruben Gallego and Elissa Slotkin in their races for open Senate seats in battleground states.
Fairshake spent $10 million in support of Slotkin during her successful Senate run against Republican Mike Rodgers, and Slotkin, who won the Michigan race by fewer than 20,000 votes, spoke in favor of crypto on the campaign trail.
Similar dynamics are setting up ahead of 2026 in contested House and Senate races. Fairshake said in January that it already had $116 million in cash on hand aimed at the 2026 midterm elections.
'We're not slowing down, and everything remains on the table,' Josh Vlasto, a spokesperson for Fairshake, told The Associated Press.
Hours before a May 19 vote to move forward on cryptocurrency legislation in the Senate, an advocacy group tied to Coinbase sent an email to the offices of U.S. senators warning that the vote would count toward their crypto-friendliness scores.
'What the spending does is put crypto on the map. It lets members know that this is not a phase, this is real industry, with real dollars, that is developing its hold in Washington,' said Calvert.
Democrats navigate around a 'crypto president'
A significant number of Democrats, 16, joined Republicans in advancing the crypto legislation. The GENIUS Act would create a new regulatory structure for stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency typically pegged to the U.S. dollar. It is viewed as a step toward consumer protections and greater legitimacy for the industry.
The sticking point for many Democrats is that while the bill prohibits members of Congress and their families from profiting off stablecoins, it excludes the president from those restrictions.
Trump, once a skeptic of the industry, has vowed in his second term to make the U.S. the global capital of crypto. Meanwhile, he and his family have moved aggressively into nearly every corner of the industry: mining operations, billion-dollar bitcoin purchases, a newly minted stablecoin and a Trump-branded meme coin.
Days after Trump's interests in the industry became public in early May, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York urged the Democratic caucus to unite and vote against the package to have a stronger hand in negotiations, according to a person familiar with the matter who insisted on anonymity to discuss private discussions.
On May 8, a bloc of Senate Democrats who had previously backed the GENIUS Act reversed course — ultimately voting to block the bill from advancing. Negotiations between Senate Democrats and Republicans followed.
The new version of the bill is now expected to pass the 100-member Senate this month. Amendments are still possible. Schumer and Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. are expected to propose one that would bar the president and his family from profiting off stablecoins, though it's unlikely to pass.
'There is room for improvements as there often is with a lot of legislation. But with this in particular, we've got issues with the president,' said Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona 'Having said that, this was negotiated with Democrats and Republicans. We got to a place. We voted on it. I expect this is the version we're going to pass.'
Still, the legislation is stirring unease. Schumer, asked if he's urging members to vote against the bill, noted that he has opposed the legislation and said 'there's division in our caucus on that issue.'
'There's a gaping hole in this bill that everybody sees,' Murphy said. 'After it's passed, it will be illegal for me to issue a cryptocurrency, but it's legal for the president of the United States.'
'If this bill passes, we kind of go from a dirt road to a paved road,' he said.
What comes next
If the Senate approves the stablecoin legislation, the bill will still need to clear the House before reaching the president's desk.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
Crypto advocates say the next priority is pushing Congress for market structure legislation, a far more sweeping effort than simply regulating stablecoins.
'Stablecoin is one step of the path. Then you need market structure. We're hopeful that the Senate works together to pass something quickly,' Calvert said.
Some Democrats view the legislation as a chance to impose basic guardrails on a rapidly growing industry that's particularly popular among men and younger voters, two groups that drifted from the party in 2024.
___
Associated Press writers Alan Suderman, Lisa Mascaro, Matt Brown and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Montreal Gazette
23 minutes ago
- Montreal Gazette
Hanes: It seems the courts can only do so much to protect English institutions from overreach
By Shock waves rippled across the globe last month when U.S. President Donald Trump slapped a ban on international students at Harvard University, part of his escalating war against America's oldest institution of higher learning. Harvard fought back and the courts granted a reprieve to 6,700 international students attending one of the world's most prestigious universities, including 700 Canadians. But it's clear Trump has it out for Harvard in particular as he seeks to remould American universities to prevent them from spreading supposedly 'woke,' leftist ideology and challenging his administration's undercutting of democracy. He has withdrawn billions in grants and research funding, arrested international students or revoked their visas, threatened universities' tax status, and interfered with diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. It's a terrifying blow to academic freedom — an attack intended to weaken a powerful institution, driven by political motives and petty resentments. Closer to home, it's hard not to notice parallels with how Premier François Legault has been treating Quebec's English universities. His efforts to hobble them started well before Trump returned to office and his methods are more subtle. But some of the consequences are similar. In 2023, his government without warning announced the doubling of tuition for out-of-province students, a move disproportionately affecting McGill, Concordia and Bishop's universities. While the amount was eventually lowered to 33 per cent and Bishop's got a partial exemption, English schools were later told they had to ensure 80 per cent of their graduates attain an intermediate level of French to graduate. The government also said it would claw back a portion of international student tuition from English universities and redistribute it to francophone institutions. The stated objective of these punitive measures was to protect French. Government ministers blamed English-speaking university students from other provinces for anglicizing downtown Montreal while also lamenting they leave Quebec after they come here to study, instead of integrating and paying taxes. The fee increase seemed intended to make students from the rest of Canada feel unwelcome — and knock the English schools, McGill in particular, down a few pegs. Business leaders, most French university rectors, Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante, academics, student groups and an advisory committee reporting to Higher Education Minister Pascale Déry all denounced the tuition hike, warning it would hurt the economy, academia, scientific research and the vitality of the higher education ecosystem. It went ahead anyway. McGill and Concordia launched a legal challenge while their revenues, recruitment and reputations suffered. In April, Quebec Superior Court overturned the tuition fee increase and the onerous French requirements for out-of-province students, calling them 'unreasonable.' This week, Déry's office announced the Quebec government won't appeal the judgment that used words like 'unfounded,' 'fuzzy,' 'erroneous' and 'incoherence' to describe the factual basis (or lack thereof) justifying the manoeuvres. Yet instead of emerging chastened, the Legault government has been emboldened. Déry's office confirmed she intends to double down on the tuition increase while also emphasizing that Quebec is under no obligation to guarantee students from outside the province access to its universities. Time will tell what the latter chilling statement really means. But in the current context, it sounds ominous for McGill and Concordia. What looked like a partial win may end up amounting to pyrrhic victory. Or maybe more like Groundhog Day. The Legault government may simply plan to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to do what it intended in the first place, this time in a way that passes legal muster. It's making a generous interpretation of the judgment — taking it as constructive criticism rather than a stern rebuke. Quebec Superior Court Justice Éric Dufour struck down the tuition hike and French requirements, but he mainly found fault with 'poverty of evidence' and contradictory arguments for failing the test of 'reasonableness.' 'It's true that discretionary power warrants a lot of room to manoeuvre and that the court must grant the minister all the latitude to act. Restraint is required when it comes to decisions based on political choices,' Dufour wrote. 'But as important as discretion is, the minister must nevertheless demonstrate that it's being exercised in a reasonable manner, that's to say in this instance, with respect to existent and founded facts.' It's a ruling largely based on administrative principles. The judge steered clear of bigger questions pertaining to rights that were raised in the case because the technical flaws made them moot to the ultimate outcome. These include McGill's argument that the tuition hike for students from other provinces violated its equality rights on the basis of language. Since the judge left these matters unanswered, perhaps this will give the universities recourse in the future. Because the fight seems destined to continue with a government that has a track record of trying to diminish English institutions, be they school boards, colleges, hospitals or universities. The battle may even ramp up if the government looks to meddle in the composition of the student bodies. All Quebec universities are reeling from a drop in enrolment from international students because of changes to both federal and provincial policy. Their higher tuition helps make up for government underfunding and is essential to conducting scientific research. The crackdown on international students may be part of a Canada-wide plan to rein in the surging number of temporary immigrants, which has contributed to the housing crisis. But in Quebec, it's also part of a broader effort to reduce immigration for the purposes of protecting the French language and culture. Legault has made it no secret that he considers anglophone students from the rest of Canada a threat to French, too. The use of the word 'access' by Déry's office with regards to students from other provinces suggests a toughening of Quebec's stand and a sharpening of previous complaints about Quebecers having to 'subsidize' the education of young people from the rest of Canada. This portends ill for McGill and Concordia's efforts to attract the best and the brightest, since many of their students come from elsewhere in the country. It appears the courts can only do so much to protect English institutions from political leaders who read encouragement into rulings that should leave them embarrassed, and who have no qualms about trampling constitutional rights to achieve their aims, invoking the notwithstanding clause to shield laws that otherwise would be struck down. It gives new meaning to the slogan on the novelty T-shirts often sold near the Roddick Gates during frosh week: 'Harvard: America's McGill.'


CTV News
36 minutes ago
- CTV News
Springsteen's Berlin concert echoes with history and a stark warning
Bruce Springsteen performs with the E Street Band at the Olympic Stadium in Berlin, Germany, Wednesday, June 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber) BERLIN — Veteran rock star Bruce Springsteen, a high-profile critic of President Donald Trump, slammed the U.S. administration as 'corrupt, incompetent and treasonous' during a concert Wednesday in Berlin. He was addressing tens of thousands of fans at a stadium built for the 1936 Olympic Games that still bears the scars of World War II and contains relics from the country's dark Nazi past. 'Tonight, we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American experiment to rise with us, raise your voices, stand with us against authoritarianism, and let freedom reign,' he said. Springsteen, long a political opponent of the president, has made increasingly pointed and contentious public statements in recent concerts. He denounced Trump's politics during a concert last month in Manchester, calling him an 'unfit president' leading a 'rogue government' of people who have 'no concern or idea for what it means to be deeply American.' Springsteen is no stranger to Berlin. In July 1988, he became one of the first Western musicians to perform in East Germany, performing to a ravenous crowd of 160,000 East Germans yearning for American rock 'n' roll and the freedom it represented to the youth living under the crumbling communist regime. An Associated Press news story from that period says 'fireworks steaked through the sky' and hundreds of people in the audience waved handmade American flags as they sang along to 'Born in the USA.' Almost four decades later, Springsteen issued a stark warning: 'The America that I love, the America that I've sung to you about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous administration.' Stefanie Dazio, The Associated Press


Toronto Star
36 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Worker who leaked plans to build golf courses in Florida parks files whistleblower suit
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — A former worker who leaked information about plans by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration to build golf courses and hotels in Florida state parks has filed a whistleblower lawsuit. James Gaddis alleges that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection retaliated against him for sharing details of the proposals, which caused bipartisan outrage and sparked protests. Ultimately the plans were scuttled. A spokesperson for the department declined to comment, saying the agency does not do so with pending litigation. ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW Gaddis, who was a consultant in DEP's Office of Park Planning, says he was directed to draw up 'secret maps' to build golf courses, hotels and pickleball courts in nine parks. Park staffers were ordered not to talk to any colleagues about the proposals, which in Gaddis' view amounted to destroying 'globally significant' environments. The experience felt like 'mapping out a future crime scene,' according to the lawsuit, which was filed in Leon County. Gaddis copied documents onto a flash drive and shared it with an unnamed intermediary, the lawsuit says, and the next day the Tampa Bay Times wrote about the plans. Gaddis says he was called into a meeting by a supervisor and asked if he shared the documents, which he admitted to. He was put on administrative leave and later fired, and the suit says that amounted to disparate treatment and retaliation. The complaint seeks damages of at least $100,000. The Republican-dominated state Legislature has since passed a bill banning development in state parks, and DeSantis signed it into law. Gaddis started an online fundraiser to help cover expenses, with an initial goal of $10,000. As of June 11, it had brought in more than $258,000. ___ Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.