Crypto’s $176 million midterm bet meets voters as the Clarity Act waits on Tuesday

Crypto-funded political groups have put somewhere between $176 million and more than $200 million into the U.S. midterms, depending on who is counting. Tuesday’s results, led by an Ohio Senate race the industry has spent heavily to swing, will shape whether the stalled market structure bill gets another chance this year.

U.S. voters finish casting ballots on Tuesday, Nov. 3, and the crypto industry has more riding on the result than almost any other single-issue lobby. Super PACs funded by exchanges and venture firms have spent heavily on House and Senate races, with the biggest sum aimed at one Senate seat in Ohio. The outcome will help decide whether the Clarity Act, the market structure bill that failed a key Senate vote in September, gets revived in the weeks after the election or has to start over with a new Congress in January.

$176 million or $200 million, depending on who counts

The size of the bet depends on the tally. A Reuters review of campaign finance and advertising data through Oct. 20 found about $176 million in crypto-linked spending across more than 100 congressional races. Roughly $150.8 million of that came from Fairshake and its affiliated committees, and about $25 million from other crypto-backed groups. CNBC, citing a count by the watchdog group Public Citizen, put the industry's total above $200 million and described the crypto groups as the largest set of single-issue super PACs in U.S. history.

Fairshake is the center of the effort. It is funded mainly by Coinbase, Ripple and Andreessen Horowitz, and it works through two partner committees. Defend American Jobs spends on behalf of Republicans and Protect Progress on behalf of Democrats, while Fairshake itself backs candidates from both parties. The network spent about $196 million in the 2024 cycle and, according to Punchbowl News, started 2026 with close to $200 million on hand.

Ohio is where the money is most concentrated. Former Sen. Sherrod Brown, the Democrat who chaired the Senate Banking Committee and was a frequent critic of the industry, is trying to win back a seat in a special election against Republican Sen. Jon Husted. Crypto groups spent about $40 million against Brown in 2024, when he lost to Bernie Moreno. This time, Reuters counted more than $68 million in crypto-related spending in the Ohio race, including more than $46 million from Defend American Jobs. CNBC reported that Fairshake and its affiliates had spent $55 million opposing Brown. The figures come from different dates and methods, but both point to the most expensive crypto-funded race on the map.

So far the spending has not moved Brown out of the lead in public polling. A Marist poll taken Oct. 15 to 18 had him at 48% among likely voters and Husted at 44%, with a margin of error of 4.5 points. Several polls in September also showed Brown ahead by three to five points.

In the House, CNBC reported that Fairshake-linked committees are backing 33 candidates, 19 Republicans and 14 Democrats, and have spent at least $1 million each on six incumbents. Earlier in the cycle the group said all 32 House incumbents it had endorsed supported the Clarity Act. Fairshake also claims that 53 of the 58 candidates it supported in primaries and special elections won, a figure that is self-reported.

Investment or influence

Supporters describe the money as a long-term play for durable rules. Colin McLaren, who heads government relations at the Solana Policy Institute, called the spending "an investment in the future." Industry figures argue that agency guidance can be reversed by the next administration, while a statute cannot be undone so easily. Fairshake spokesman Geoff Vetter has said the group backs pro-crypto candidates in both parties, though its Senate support this cycle has reportedly gone only to Republicans.

Critics see the same numbers as an attempt to buy a friendly Congress. Reuters found that one ad against Brown repeated a claim about the IRS and Social Security that fact-checkers had already rejected. In Illinois, Fairshake-linked groups spent more than $10 million against Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton and about $2.5 million against state Rep. La Shawn Ford. Both won their primaries anyway. Ford sent the group a cease-and-desist letter over ads that he said misrepresented a federal indictment dropped years ago, and he tied the attacks to his support for a state bill that would make crypto firms register with Illinois regulators.

The Clarity Act itself remains the main dividing line. The House passed it 294 to 134 in July 2025. On Sept. 15 this year, a Senate cloture vote on the motion to proceed failed 49 to 50, short of the 60 votes needed. The main dispute was not the split of oversight between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. It was ethics language. Democrats said the draft did not reach the president and his family's crypto businesses, and some want those holdings sold off before the bill moves. Republicans said they had already made more than 100 changes at Democrats' request. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts argued before the vote that the country needs crypto rules, but not ones written by the industry. Sen. Dave McCormick of Pennsylvania said afterward he was still committed to passing the bill, and Sen. Thom Tillis filed a motion to reconsider that keeps the vote alive procedurally.

Last week's $6.3 billion theft from Binance added a new layer. Some Republicans argued the bill would have given firms clearer legal cover to freeze stolen funds. Democrats and consumer groups said the hack shows the risks of loosening oversight.

A lame-duck window for the Clarity Act

The most likely window for the Clarity Act is the lame-duck session after Tuesday. The Senate is scheduled to sit until Nov. 6 in its current work period and can return before the new Congress is sworn in on Jan. 3. Outgoing members sometimes find it easier to cut deals in that stretch. If the election gives either party a clear mandate, leaders may prefer to wait and write a new version next year, which would push any final law well into 2027.

The Ohio result will be read as a referendum on the industry's tactics. A Husted win would let Fairshake argue that it can unseat a prominent critic twice. A Brown win, after more spending against him than in 2024, would hand opponents a story about the limits of crypto money and could make some lawmakers less wary of crossing the industry.

In the meantime, regulators are moving on their own track. The CFTC is collecting comments until mid-December on a voluntary registration path for crypto venues, and the SEC's proposed token offering rules closed for comment on Oct. 20. Those steps can be reversed by a future administration, which is why the industry keeps pushing for a statute.

The first number to watch on Tuesday night is the Ohio Senate count. After that comes the partisan balance in the Senate and whether it shifts the 60-vote math, then any word from Senate leaders on a lame-duck schedule for the bill, and whether the ethics provisions are reopened or dropped.

This article is for information only and is not investment advice.

Sources

BTC	—
ETH	—
XRP	—
SOL	—
BNB	—
DOGE	—

Crypto’s $176 million midterm bet meets voters as the Clarity Act waits on Tuesday

$176 million or $200 million, depending on who counts

Investment or influence

A lame-duck window for the Clarity Act

CHAINBRIEF Analysis

Fifty companies say no to OKX-ICE tokenized stocks as first opt-out window closes

Italy’s planned exit tax would bill departing crypto holders for paper gains

Binance hack hands Washington a fresh argument over exchange rules days before the vote

Binance sets aside $6.34 billion as analysts tie record hack to North Korea