Politico on May 13 published a poll by Public First surveying 2,035 American adults showing that only 4% of respondents said that when deciding whom to vote for, they would factor in politicians’ positions on cryptocurrency policy. The top three issues respondents want Congress to prioritize, in order, are: affordable housing, consumer fraud protection, and lowering bank fees.
Politico/Public First poll: confirmed full data
Based on the polling confirmation data released by Politico (sample size: 2,035 American adults):
4%: Considering candidates’ cryptocurrency policy positions when voting
18%: Saying setting rules for the cryptocurrency market is Congress’s top priority (only 1% lower than regulation of large banks)
27%: Supporting or strongly supporting the government making cryptocurrencies legal as mainstream financial assets
31%: Opposing or strongly opposing making cryptocurrencies legal as mainstream assets
45%: Saying the risk of investing in cryptocurrency is too high and not worth taking
25%: Saying investing in cryptocurrency is worth it
51% and above: Never having considered trading cryptocurrency and will not do so in the future
19%: Having traded cryptocurrency
7%: Among respondents who had traded cryptocurrency, saying candidates’ positions would affect their vote
Republican Representative Dusty Johnson told Politico: “Most voters don’t care about digital assets, but those who do care about digital assets care a lot.”
HarrisX poll: contradictory data released in the same period
On Friday, HarrisX published a poll of 2,008 registered U.S. voters showing that 47% of respondents said that if a candidate supports passing a cryptocurrency regulatory bill, they would consider voting for that candidate to at least some extent, even if it is not their supported party.
The two polls differ in methodology: Politico/Public First surveyed the general adult population, with the question framed as direct voting considerations; HarrisX surveyed registered voters, with the question framed as cross-party willingness under a specific hypothetical scenario.
Cryptocurrency lobbying funds: confirmed figures compiled by Molly White
According to data compiled by researcher Molly White:
2024 election: Cryptocurrency lobbying groups spent more than $130 million, the most among all industries
2026 midterm elections: Already spent $320 million trying to influence election outcomes
Illinois: This year has spent more than $5.5 million on congressional races opposing specific candidates
CLARITY bill legislative progress: confirmed procedural milestones
The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to vote on Thursday on whether to advance a bill intended to reach an agreement with crypto and bank-industry lobbying groups. The House version of the CLARITY Act has passed, while the Senate version is still under review. As of the time of the report, the results of Thursday’s vote had not yet been released.
Frequently asked questions
Which is more accurate in reflecting voters’ attitudes toward cryptocurrency: Politico’s 4% or HarrisX’s 47%?
The two polls measure different behavioral dimensions. Politico’s 4% is the proportion of all voting decision factors where cryptocurrency policy is an active consideration; HarrisX’s 47% is the proportion considering cross-party voting in the specific scenario where “a candidate supports a crypto bill.” The surveyed groups are also different (general adults vs registered voters).
Where, specifically, does the $320 million in cryptocurrency lobbying money go?
Based on data compiled by Molly White, the $320 million is used to try to influence the November 2026 midterm elections, including spending more than $5.5 million in congressional races in Illinois to oppose specific candidates. Lobbying groups have explicitly said they will use the funds to target candidates who do not support crypto positions.
What is the CLARITY Act’s current legislative status?
As of May 14, 2026, the House version of the CLARITY Act has passed, and the Senate version is still being advanced. The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to vote on Thursday on whether to advance the relevant bill, but the committee has not yet released the vote results.
