Miami Mayor Denis Suarez, who’s running for president of the United States, took a shot at his Republican counterpart in the presidential race, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.
Emphasizing his own support for crypto, Suarez said about DeSantis: “You gotta go beyond just saying that the central bank digital currencies are bad. Everybody agrees on that. That’s a very easy position.”
That incident tells a lot about the role crypto could have in the upcoming presidential race, but it says even more about DeSantis, who, until recently, was the most prominent “crypto candidate” in the field.
Now the politician faces harsh competition from other, vocally pro-crypto candidates, and his chances to become president or even win the Republican primaries are rapidly declining.
How DeSantis became a crypto darling
The Florida governor has been vocally supporting crypto since as early as 2021, when he proposed to allow businesses to pay state fees with cryptocurrencies in the 2022–2023 budgetary year.
Standing at a podium bearing the phrase “Big Brother’s Digital Dollar,” the politician urged Florida lawmakers and their “like-minded” counterparts to preventively prohibit the introduction of the digital dollar in their states. A CBDC is all about surveilling Americans and controlling their behavior, DeSantis added.
Later, he continued to criticize the CBDC and its potential issuer, the United States Federal Reserve, on Twitter (now called X).
In May, DeSantis signed a bill restricting the use of CBDCs, including foreign ones, in the state. Once again, he emphasized the difference between CBDCs and private digital currencies: “I think they want to crowd out and eliminate other types of digital assets like cryptocurrency because they can’t control that, so they don’t like that.”
Later, DeSantis promised to lobby for the same prohibition if he becomes the president of the United States.
DeSantis vowed not only to ban CBDCs forever but to end President Joe Biden’s “war on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency” should he succeed him in the White House. However, he didn’t refer to any specific policies of the Biden administration, preferring to concentrate his attention on the Federal Reserve.
Back in May, when the list of candidates for the presidency was much shorter, DeSantis seemed to many to be the logical choice for Republicans in general and the crypto community in particular.
DeSantis gained fame as a fighter against sanctuary cities, LGBTQ+ rights, gun control and the Affordable Care Act. But for a while, those could have been seen at least as a realistic compromise, signifying the partisan divide over crypto.
However, in the last few months, everything has changed.
Presidential candidacy unravels
Epithets about DeSantis, like “circling the drain” and “falling apart,” started to appear in the media in the middle of July. By the end of last month, his campaign had to cut almost a third of its staff to stay afloat.
DeSantis still remains the second Republican candidate after former President Donald Trump, according to polls. However, if at the beginning of July he was a clear second choice for 35% of Republican voters, by the middle of August, this rating plummeted to 23%.
The pundits agree DeSantis failed at his strategy of becoming a “Trump-not-Trump” candidate, engaging aggressively in the same cultural wars but with a promise of electability in the midst of criminal investigations of the former president’s alleged behavior.
As it soon became clear, DeSantis failed to attract the loyal base of Trump’s conservative voters, who still believe in their candidate, while at the same time scaring away more moderate Republicans, who hope to cast their votes for someone not obsessed with a struggle for schools’ curricula.
DeSantis engaged in a feud with Trump, claiming that the latter failed to fulfill his presidential promises during his term, even with regard to building his notorious wall with Mexico. In response, Trump called his fellow Republican “Rondesanctimonious” and advised him to get a “personality transplant.”
“When he tries to be as visceral as Trump, he just comes off as weird,” sums up David Bateman, a political scientist at Cornell.
Alternative candidates
The good news is that even if DeSantis fails, he’s not the only pro-crypto candidate.
The Democrats have Robert Kennedy Jr., who publicly confessed to buying 2 BTC for each of his children. He also announced that he would begin accepting campaign donations in Bitcoin and make the currency exempt from capital gains taxes if elected president.
Kennedy even promised to back the U.S. dollar with Bitcoin in the event of his victory. But for all that, in late July, just 9% of Democrats had a favorable opinion of Kennedy, with words like “crazy,” “dangerous,” “insane,” “nutjob,” “conspiracy” and “crackpot” among the most popular to describe the candidate.
Perhaps still far from the obvious favorite, the youngest-ever Republican presidential candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy, managed to raise the level of favorable opinions about him from 16% in April to 27.2% in August and stands third in the polls after Trump and DeSantis.
The candidate, called “very promising” by entrepreneur Elon Musk, pushed for a stronger crypto industry in the U.S. and also accepts BTC for campaign donations, even offering nonfungible tokens (NFTs) to qualifying donors.
One obvious problem is that Ramaswamy demonstrates no less eccentricity than Kennedy, comparing Massachusetts Representative Ayanna Pressley to the Ku Klux Klan’s grand wizard (Pressley is Black) and rapping Eminem’s songs at events. The rapper has since asked Ramaswamy to stop.
“Speaking about Governor DeSantis, I think it will be surprising to some that, by some polling, he may have been the winner or a winner of a recent debate,” Martin Dobelle, co-founder and CEO of Engage — a platform for crypto donations to political campaigns — told Cointelegraph.
Indeed, according to polls conducted in the aftermath of the Republican candidates’ first debate, 29% of debate viewers considered DeSantis to be the best performer of the evening.
However, 26% of respondents named Ramaswamy as the champion of the debate. It should be noted that Donald Trump was absent from the debate.
Nevertheless, Dobelle doesn’t think that one person should be considered a “crypto candidate,” nor should a single party be named the pro-crypto party.
“Dragging financial technology into this polarized political climate is not going to be a constructive strategy,” he said. “Rather than putting its chips behind one candidate, party or another, crypto should be building bridges and meeting people where they are in terms of where and how to start conversations about policy.”
Dave Weisberger, CEO of algorithmic trading platform CoinRoutes, believes that it’s not just candidates who can influence crypto regulation. He told Cointelegraph, “Even with the current Biden administration’s open hostility towards digital assets, they might change policy if the pollsters tell them to do so.”
Perhaps the major intrigue that remains is Donald Trump’s crypto card for 2024. A vocal Bitcoin critic during his presidential term, the politician was recently revealed to possess over $2.8 million in an Ethereum wallet, in addition to over $4.8 million from licensing fees tied to NFT collections using his image.
With Do Kwon scheduled to be sentenced on Thursday after pleading guilty to two felony counts, a US federal judge is asking prosecutors and defense attorneys about the Terraform Labs co-founder’s legal troubles in his native country, South Korea, and Montenegro.
In a Monday filing in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Judge Paul Engelmayer asked Kwon’s lawyers and attorneys representing the US government about the charges and “maximum and minimum sentences” the Terraform co-founder could face in South Korea, where he is expected to be extradited after potentially serving prison time in the United States.
Kwon pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud in August and is scheduled to be sentenced by Engelmayer on Thursday.
In addition to the judge’s questions on Kwon potentially serving time in South Korea, he asked whether there was agreement that “none of Mr. Kwon’s time in custody in Montenegro” — where he served a four-month sentence for using falsified travel documents and fought extradition to the US for more than a year — would be credited to any potential US sentence.
Judge Engelmayer’s questions signaled concerns that, should the US grant extradition to South Korea to serve “the back half of his sentence,” the country’s authorities could release him early.
Kwon was one of the most prominent figures in the crypto and blockchain industry in 2022 before the collapse of the Terra ecosystem, which many experts agree contributed to a market crash that resulted in several companies declaring bankruptcy and significant losses to investors.
The sentencing recommendation from the US government said that Kwon had “caused losses that eclipsed those caused” by former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, former Celsius CEO Alex Mashinsky and OneCoin’s Karl Sebastian Greenwood combined. All three men are serving multi-year sentences in federal prison.
Will Do Kwon serve time in South Korea?
The Terraform co-founder’s lawyers said that even if Engelmayer were to sentence Kwon to time served, he would “immediately reenter pretrial detention pending his criminal charges in South Korea,” and potentially face up to 40 years in the country, where he holds citizenship.
Thursday’s sentencing hearing could mark the beginning of the end of Kwon’s chapter in the 2022 collapse of Terraform. His whereabouts amid the crypto market downturn were not publicly known until he was arrested in Montenegro and held in custody to await extradition to the US, where he was indicted in March 2023 for his role at Terraform.
South Korean authorities issued an arrest warrant for Kwon in 2022, but have not had him in custody since the collapse of the Terra ecosystem. The country’s prosecutors applied to extradite Kwon from Montenegro simultaneously with the US, while they were pursuing similar cases against individuals tied to Terraform.
The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the watchdog overseeing the country’s financial sector, has released proposals as part of its strategy to “boost UK investment culture,” and is asking for help from the crypto industry.
In discussion and consultation papers released on Monday, the FCA asked crypto companies to provide feedback on proposals aimed at “expanding consumer access to investments” and amending rules for “client categorization and conflicts of interest.”
The discussion paper noted that “virtually all of the underperformance on high [digital engagement practices] apps could be attributed to trading in cryptoassets and [contracts for difference.” The proposal highlighted potential risks for consumers using “cryptoasset proxies” without investment limits, warnings, or “appropriateness tests.”
In its consultation paper, the UK watchdog proposed:
“We will also add guidance that a personal investment history mainly in speculative high risk or leveraged products or crypto assets is not usually an indicator of professional capability, unless there is strong evidence that the client meets the threshold of a professional client from other Relevant Factors, including the client’s ability to bear potential losses.”
According to the watchdog, the proposed changes would streamline the FCA’s existing guidelines and were part of a strategy to potentially “remove some arbitrary tests and give firms more responsibility to get it right.”
Companies that advised clients on or sold digital assets were asked to provide responses to the recommendations by February and March.
Slow and steady advances toward policies that favor cryptocurrency
The UK has been a significant hub for crypto companies doing business outside the United States, which, until the about-face on regulation and enforcement under US President Donald Trump, many industry leaders said that they considered an uncertain regulatory environment.
In December, the UK government passed a law treating digital assets as property, improving clarity on cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin (BTC) in cases such as the recovery of stolen goods or insolvency.
With the market steadily growing in the country, the government was reportedly considering a ban on crypto donations to political parties.
A nationwide grooming gangs inquiry must “leave no stone unturned”, Kemi Badenoch has said as the Conservatives urged the government to ensure ethnicity and religious background are taken into account.
Ms Badenoch and shadow home secretary Chris Philp, appearing alongside a survivor and two parents of survivors/victims, called on the government to adopt draft terms of reference for the inquiry drawn up by the Conservatives with help from some grooming gangs victims and survivors.
The Tory leader said her party is willing to work alongside the government, and an inquiry needs to be undertaken on a cross-party basis as it is ultimately about the survivors, victims and their families.
The Conservatives’ terms of reference include ensuring the inquiry examines the ethnicity and religious background of offenders, a two-year time limit and a focus on extra-familial abuse.
They also want it to forward evidence to police and prosecutors where criminality is indicated.
In June, the government announced it would be launching a national inquiry into grooming gangs, representing a U-turn after previously accusing Reform and the Conservatives of jumping on a far-right bandwagon when they called for one earlier in the year after Labour announced five local inquiries.
More from Politics
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:29
‘I’d wake up with really bad bruises’
But a national inquiry has been delayed by rows about its scope, while both shortlisted chair candidates withdrew their candidacy following criticism by survivors of their careers as a police chief and a social worker.
A group of women also quit the inquiry’s victim liaison panel – one who was present with the Tories on Monday – as they accused the government of attempting to widen the inquiry’s remit to consider other forms of child sexual abuse.
Ms Badenoch said: “I want to be clear that a national inquiry must leave no stone unturned.
“It must investigate councils, the police and even the government if necessary.
“It must be time-limited, and it must consider the role of ethnicity, religion and other cultural factors.
“Baroness (Louise) Casey’s own report admitted that many of these cases are committed by people of Asian and Pakistani ethnicities.
“Her own report said that those who downplay the ethnicity of perpetrators are continuing to let down society, local communities and the victims. We agree.
“As I said, I have spoken to many survivors. We are speaking on their behalf.
“Their lives and their families’ lives have been turned upside down, so separate to this inquiry, the government must act now to ensure that they and their families are supported so they can heal.”
No political party owns high ground on this matter
Fiona Goddard was close to tears when she told me on Monday that pulling out of the grooming gang inquiry panel was “the most difficult decision of my life”.
The survivor of child sexual abuse in Oldham has spent years campaigning for a national inquiry – but sacrificed her chance to play a part in it because she felt it was moving in the wrong direction and broadening its scope.
The government insists that its scope has not changed, but time has marched on since two candidates to chair the inquiry pulled out in October, and the opposition has stepped into the void – offering their own version of what the inquiry should look like.
However, Kemi Badenoch’s call that “no stone should be left unturned” was reminiscent of her own party’s pledge in December 2018 when then Home Secretary Sajid Javid promised to investigate the ethnicity of grooming gangs with exactly the same words.
The subsequent review published in 2020 found that most group-based child abusers were white but also revealed the lack of data being collected on ethnicity, which the Conservatives promised to improve.
Five years on, Louise Casey criticised the lack of data in her rapid review published earlier this year.
Asked if her own government had done enough, the leader of the opposition pointed to initiatives but added, “We didn’t know everything we know now”.
The truth is, no political party owns the high ground on this matter – just as Fiona Goddard is first to say that no one survivor can speak for everyone.
There is division about how this inquiry moves forward, and there’s no evidence of political parties working together to bring unity.
What it needs more than anything is an independent chair who can pull it out of the hands of politicians.
Baroness Casey, known as a Whitehall troubleshooter, having worked on social issues for successive prime ministers since Tony Blair, is assisting with setting up the inquiry, but acknowledged it could now be “months” before a chair was appointed.
Fiona Goddard, one of the survivors who left the inquiries’ liaison panel, backed the Conservatives’ proposals as she said she had “lost faith in the ability of the government to make more meaningful progress”.
Mr Philp said a two-year time limit on the inquiry is essential as he said: “It can’t drag on for years and years.”
He said the Tories were being “constructive” and that dual nationals found to have been involved in grooming should have their British citizenship removed and be deported “with no exceptions”.
A Labour Party spokesman said: “The Conservatives’ record on this issue is clear: they had years to take action on this appalling scandal, yet time and time again they failed to do so.
“This Labour government accepted all the recommendations from Baroness Casey’s report and we are committed to a full, statutory, national inquiry to uncover the truth.
“It will be robust, rigorous and laser-focused on grooming gangs, and its scope will not change.
“The inquiry will direct and oversee local investigations, with the power to compel witnesses and summon evidence. And it will explicitly examine the background, ethnicity and culture of offenders.”