On the main stage of the Bitcoin 2024 conference, Rep. Wiley Nickel (D-NC) shared that he is working to push Democrats to shift to a more pro-Bitcoin and crypto stance.
He told the event attendees that he recently wrote a letter to the Democratic National Committee signed by 28 Democrats, 14 of whom are in Congress, calling for a new approach to digital asset policy from the party and its presidential candidate.
Rep. Nickel explained that the new approach should include “pro-digital asset language in the party platform, selecting a vice presidential candidate with experience in digital asset policy, selecting an SEC chairman who is pro-innovation, and engaging with the industry in a meaningful way.”
We caught up with Rep. Nickel to try to learn more about how he plans to get Democrats on board with the Bitcoin wave.
Below is a transcript of our conversation, edited for length and clarity.
Frank Corva: What lessons did you learn from the Bitcoin conference?
Rep. Wiley Nickel: I had a great time. I enjoyed talking to people who care about this issue at all levels, and most importantly, making the progressive case for cryptocurrency and why the work we do as Democrats in Congress is so important.
Keeping this in the partisan space was my main concern in Nashville, and it’s what I’ve been working on in Congress. If this becomes a partisan political football—and Donald Trump wants to politicize this more than anyone—it will set the industry back a decade in Congress.
DeFi and Bitcoin will continue regardless of who is in power, but it’s really important that we set clear rules of the road, have good regulation of the industry to protect consumers, keep these jobs here, and encourage innovation. That was my focus in Congress, and I was happy to be able to replicate that in Nashville.
Curva: I think it’s important that more moderate Democrats like you have a voice. Do you feel like there are more Democrats like you who want to speak out in this way, who want to say that they’re going to keep Bitcoin and crypto jobs in the United States and that they want the United States to be at the forefront of financial innovation?
Nickel Representative: I think so, because frankly we are dealing with this issue correctly. Talking about financial inclusion is so important. The current financial system is not working for everyone, and we have a very promising solution here with cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin, which will help the people I represent enormously.
I think we’re seeing a new perspective on digital asset regulation emerge in the Democratic Party. Whether you love crypto or hate it, it’s here to stay. So we need to protect consumers, encourage innovation, and enhance America’s competitiveness. These are the big public policy issues.
We are working hard to build a coalition of like-minded Democrats in our party. We have been successful in encouraging the Harris campaign to reach out to the industry, and I continue to advocate for a reset.
The progress we have made in the House is undeniable: 71 Democrats joined Republicans in FIT21Digital Asset Market Structure Bill. Actions speak louder than words. And the fact that I was able to convince Nancy Pelosi and members of our Democratic leadership in the House to pass this bill says good things about preserving the future of Bitcoin in this partisan space.
Curva: This is a good and important reason for single-issue voters or crypto-friendly voters to consider voting more Democratic if that’s where they stand in this upcoming election. Is there anything else you would say to Bitcoin or crypto-friendly voters to tell them that Democrats don’t want to be the party that stifles this innovation. Can these voters believe that things are going to be different than they have been for the past three and a half years?
Nickel Representative: Sure, and I thought it was important to write a letter to the Democratic National Committee and the Harris campaign, which I announced in Nashville from the podium. It’s a letter urging the DNC to include digital assets language in the party platform, to appoint an SEC chairman who is pro-innovation, and to urge the campaign to reach out to industry experts. Those were some of the highlights of the letter.
Thirteen other House Democrats have joined the letter, and there are a lot of people who support it. I wanted to put this out there so people know that this is an important issue. You have 20% of registered voters who own crypto, and there are over a million single-issue voters, so we need to continue to make good public policy positions on this issue. I think we’ll see that from the Harris campaign in the coming weeks.
Curva: Looking at the most practical level, what do you think Democrats might have been able to do differently or better during a Biden administration?
Nickel Representative: On the positive side, we have Bitcoin and Ether ETFs that have been approved by the SEC, so I can’t disagree with that. We’ve worked hard in Congress to get the SEC to do this in a bipartisan way on the House Financial Services Committee, where I serve. I’m also a member of the Digital Assets Subcommittee. We’re dealing with this issue a lot in the House.
But Gary Gensler’s approach to regulation through enforcement at the SEC has not served Kamala Harris or Joe Biden’s interests. Gary Gensler has taken the wrong approach, but he’s not the only voice in the Biden administration. There are a lot of other senior leaders who feel very differently. A lot of other regulators like Rustin Behnam at the CFTC have a different approach. So we have one regulator who is moving in the wrong direction, but it’s important for people to know that he doesn’t represent all Democrats.
Curva: Are Democratic senators and congressmen learning about the positive use cases of Bitcoin? These include financial inclusion; providing financial services to the unbanked, not just in the US but globally; cheap remittances; etc. Do you find politicians becoming more educated?
Nickel Representative: First, it’s all about education. The people who supported the FIT21 project from the democratic side were those who were involved in the project, who were willing to have meetings, listen, understand and learn about this very new technology.
This is not the same situation as it was four years ago, eight years ago, or twelve years ago. And on your point, you’re absolutely right. There are 1.4 billion unbanked people worldwide, and most of these people are from marginalized communities. This hampers their financial management and exacerbates poverty and inequality. There’s a very strong progressive argument to be made about how cryptocurrencies are revolutionizing financial inclusion and economic empowerment and offering new ways to build wealth outside of the traditional financial system.
Curva: Thinking beyond the United States, Bitcoin gives people property rights—which we have strong laws protecting here in the United States—by default. That’s powerful in places where people don’t have those rights. Will more progressives come out and recognize the importance of this?
Nickel Representative: I certainly hope so. That’s been my focus in Congress. We need to embrace new technology. When you look at the Internet, you imagine people from one political party opposing the Internet in the 1990s, it’s crazy.
When you look back a decade and see the opposition to Web3 in Congress — that position is not going to hold up very long. The people who are against encryption on the Democratic side are completely wrong, and they are not really looking at how to strengthen this industry and protect consumers.
I’ve spent much of the past year and a half talking about how legislation passed in Congress could prevent this kind of avalanche. And that’s an important part of what Americans should focus on.
I went on a trip with a congressional delegation with Patrick McHenry (R-NC), the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. We went to Singapore, Abu Dhabi, Tokyo to see the regulations, the regulatory bodies, the mature markets for cryptocurrencies. One of the things that everyone said was that they need the United States to be part of the solution here. They need the United States to lead the rest of the world.
It’s really about democratizing finance. And when we do that, we’re going to be able to uplift people across the United States when they can save and transfer money. And they’re going to be able to do it much faster, and with much less bureaucracy. And those are really good things if you’re talking about uplifting people in the United States and around the world using Bitcoin and other Web 3 or blockchain technologies.
Curva: One of the big concerns for Bitcoin users — and one that both presidential candidates Trump and Kennedy have spoken about directly — is the idea of being able to hold your private keys without any sort of AML/KYC requirement. Would Democrats support everyone being able to hold their private keys in a non-custodial manner?
Nickel Representative: In Congress, we really focused on doing a few things before we moved to the next level of things. It was industry regulation, FIT21, the Digital Asset Market Structure Bill, and stablecoins. We got off track. SAP121 For custodial banking services.
These are the things that I think we need to address first, and then move to the next level of things, and I’m really optimistic that we’ll be able to get those things done in this Congress.
Curva: Two days after the Bitcoin conference, some of the Bitcoins that were in the custody of the US government were moved to other addresses. Do you know where the government moved them? Is the US government selling them? Have you heard anything about what is going on?
Nickel Representative: no I did not.
Curva: Do you have any final thoughts you’d like to share?
Nickel Representative: We are pushing hard to reset the relationship with the Harris campaign on this issue. Trump has certainly made his positions clear.
I’m just pushing to make sure that people who own cryptocurrencies — who are evenly divided across parties — know that this is an important issue for Democrats in the US Congress.