Editor’s note: Morning Money is a free version of POLITICO Pro Financial Services morning newsletter, which is delivered to our s each morning at 5:15 a.m. The POLITICO Pro platform combines the news you need with tools you can use to take action on the day’s biggest stories. Act on the news with POLITICO Pro . The crypto industry is at war with itself over a Senate Agriculture Committee bill that would give the Commodity Futures Trading Commission oversight of Bitcoin and Ether markets. “It doesn’t seem to be totally ready for primetime yet,” said Blockchain Association Executive Director Kristin Smith in an interview. Simmering tensions over the bipartisan bill, which was introduced by Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.) earlier this year, spilled into the open this week after crypto attorney Gabriel Shapiro posted draft language suggesting possible changes that could affect how decentralized finance developers register with the CFTC. “Discussions are ongoing and any bill language that [is] circulating is from working drafts,” said Patrick Creamer, a Republican Senate Ag spokesperson. The possible changes landed in the aftermath of a story from the Block that said another amendment might give the SEC more say in determining which digital assets are securities or commodities (SEC Chair Gary Gensler has said that the overwhelming majority of crypto tokens should register with his agency). This ticked a lot of people off for two reasons. The first one is simple. Most crypto execs want to keep Gensler as far away as possible from their industry because they view SEC oversight as onerous, impossible, expensive or some combination thereof. The second is only slightly more nuanced. While setting rules for centralized exchanges like Coinbase and FTX has been at the core of the industry’s policy battles, many of crypto’s true believers are more concerned about protecting DeFi trading and payment systems that mimic — but are not specifically controlled by – a centralized exchange or brokerage. As introduced, the Stabenow-Boozman bill appeared to prioritize the needs of the former over the latter. It’s something DeFi partisans have quietly bristled over for months as larger groups like FTX threw their weight behind a bill that would — at least in their view — further entrench the industry’s biggest players at the expense of smaller DeFi projects. Framework Ventures co-founder Vance Spencer went so far as to claim the legislation was the product of a “ shadow cabal that is trying to make it a reality .” FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, who's championed the bill, sought to dispel those concerns in a lengthy blog post and tweets on Wednesday evening, arguing that “we should make sure that code, peer to peer transfers, validators, etc. are free while also ensuring that retail-facing platforms and marketing build in customer protection.” But here’s the thing: Elements of the draft posted by Shapiro would actually make it easier for DeFi developers to avoid CFTC registration. And that could come with its own set of headaches. One reason why Stabenow-Boozman is viewed as a potential lame duck bill is because it was backed by the Center for American Progress — a rare progressive endorsement that was intended to draw support from crypto-skeptic Democrats. If DeFi services don't have to meet the same standards as their centralized counterparts, Stabenow and Boozman could have trouble from the left flank. “If the final DCCPA text exempts or creates substantively different rules for DeFi (compared to CeFi) I will change my position on the bill and work to defeat it,” CAP’s Todd Phillips tweeted . IT’S FRIDAY — Have a tip, story idea or feedback to share? Send it to: kdavidson@politico.com and ssutton@politico.com .
|