Community Trust ScoreVerified
Two Super PACs tied to the cryptocurrency industry dropped more than $1.5 million on media campaigns targeting House and Senate races across Florida, Alaska, and Wyoming. The spending came fast — and it came right after a stinging primary loss in Michigan that showed even big money can’t always buy a seat.
Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress, both affiliated with the broader Fairshake network, moved the funds ahead of August 18 primaries. In Alaska, Defend American Jobs put more than $500,000 behind Representative Nick Begich’s re-election bid. A roughly similar amount went to Sydney Gruters in Florida’s 16th district. And another comparable chunk landed behind Representative Harriet Hageman in Wyoming. Three races, three candidates, three bets — all placed within what looks like a pretty deliberate window.
Protect Progress also wrote a smaller check: over $50,000 to back Lois Frankel’s re-election in Florida’s 23rd district.
Who the PACs Are Betting On
The candidate selection wasn’t random. Begich, Hageman, and Frankel all voted in favor of both the GENIUS Act and the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act — known as the CLARITY Act — during their time in Congress. That voting record seems to be basically the ticket for PAC support right now. Gruters is a bit of a different case. She hasn’t made public statements on crypto, but she did signal some support through advocacy group questionnaires, which was apparently enough to get the money flowing her direction.
Stand With Crypto, a separate crypto advocacy organization, has been rating candidates based on their public positions and crypto support. The group’s stated goal is to lock in crypto market structure legislation during the 2026 Congress. It’s not a PAC itself, but the ratings it produces probably shape where Fairshake’s affiliated groups decide to concentrate their dollars.
The Michigan loss is still fresh. Protect Progress backed Shri Thanedar in that primary, and he lost to State Representative Donavan McKinney. No amount of media spending guaranteed a win, and the Michigan result made that clear in a pretty blunt way. Crypto PACs spent over $170 million during the entire 2024 election cycle, so the resources are real — but so is the volatility of individual races.
CLARITY Act Hangs in the Balance
Here’s the thing that makes all of this spending feel more urgent. As of Thursday, the US Senate hadn’t confirmed whether it would vote on the CLARITY Act before heading into its month-long recess. That’s a real problem for the industry. If the bill doesn’t move before recess, the window tightens considerably, and the whole push to get favorable incumbents re-elected starts to look even more calculated.
All 435 House seats are up in 2026. So are 33 Senate seats. The way sitting lawmakers vote on crypto-related bills between now and November could directly shape whether they get PAC money behind them — or whether they face a well-funded opponent. It’s not subtle. The crypto industry has made its priorities pretty clear, and the financial backing follows the voting record with a kind of mechanical consistency.
The CLARITY Act itself would establish a framework for digital asset market structure — a regulatory question that’s been murky for years. Exchanges, token issuers, and protocol developers have all been operating in a legal gray zone while Congress debated jurisdictional questions between the SEC and CFTC. Legislation that settles that question is worth a lot to the industry. Worth, apparently, $1.5 million in a single spending round — and that’s just what’s been reported so far.
What the Michigan Loss Actually Means
Some people will read the Michigan result as a sign that crypto PAC money has limits. That’s probably fair. Thanedar lost despite the backing, and McKinney won a district where crypto spending didn’t move the needle enough. But the PACs don’t seem to be pulling back. If anything, the Florida-Alaska-Wyoming round looks like a recalibration — pick candidates with stronger existing positions, tighter districts, and clearer voting records on the legislation that matters.
Gruters is still an open question. She’s the one candidate in this batch without a public crypto stance on record. Whether she becomes a vocal supporter of the CLARITY Act or stays quiet probably depends on how the primary goes and what comes after.
Frankel’s $50,000 support is notably smaller than the $500,000-plus going to Begich, Hageman, and Gruters. No explanation was given for the gap.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much did crypto PACs spend on the Florida, Alaska, and Wyoming races?
Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress reported spending over $1.5 million combined on media campaigns across those three states ahead of the August 18 primaries.
Which candidates received the largest crypto PAC investments?
Representative Nick Begich in Alaska, Sydney Gruters in Florida’s 16th district, and Representative Harriet Hageman in Wyoming each received more than $500,000 from Defend American Jobs.
