Short thoughts, notes, links, and musings by Molly White. RSS 
A bit rich for Senator Bernie Moreno — by far the #1 beneficiary of crypto super PAC spending in 2024, now a champion of the industry's legislation — to accuse anyone of caping for special interest super PACs
Just had to patch a bug on the Tech Influence Watch Michigan House District 13 election page, stemming from Shri Thanedar reporting -$1.1 million in receipts.
Why is Thanedar reporting negative receipts? He put $3.7 million of campaign funds into crypto.
Setting aside the absurd premise of this op-ed, I love that the writer felt the need to hedge with "not that has been reported"
"No one's reported that one of the most famous popstars in the world dated a man who at the time was a random oyster farmer from Maine, BUT IT IS POSSIBLE"
One of the government's attorneys in the CFTC's lawsuit against the states who've sued Kalshi was a lawyer for Kalshi in its lawsuit against the CFTC in 2023. He joined the DOJ in February 2025.
The CFTC (the US commodities regulator) has just sued Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois for their efforts to "outlaw, regulate, or otherwise restrain" prediction markets like Kalshi.
This is another escalation by newly appointed CFTC chair Mike Selig (and sole Commissioner at the agency), who has taken it upon himself to assert the CFTC's sole regulatory authority over prediction markets. Recently, the CFTC filed a supporting brief in Crypto.com's lawsuit against Nevada.
As I wrote then, "Since the CFTC has filed no enforcement actions against prediction markets after embracing the sector following Trump’s election, Selig’s jurisdictional claim seems designed to shield the sector rather than regulate it."
Nevertheless, the CFTC's press release accompanying these lawsuits claims that state regulatory intervention could result in "poorer consumer protection and increased risk of fraud and manipulation".
i love combing through FEC data because how else would i have learned of Big Nut
The cryptocurrency industry super PACs dumped $14.2 million into the Illinois primaries. 90% of that – $12.8 million – was wasted, in that it went to opposing Democratic candidates who won their primaries (Stratton in the Senate race, Ford in H-07) or supporting their opponents.
The PACs' only victories in the state were where they contributed money towards outcomes that were already highly likely. They opposed Robert Peters (H-02), who had been polling in third place and ultimately received 12% of the vote. They supported Bean (who was leading the polls in H-08) and incumbent Budzinski (H-13).
Sadly this early spending in Illinois used up less than 6% of what the super PACs have on hand, so buckle up for a looong eight months.
The Coinbase-backed "Stand With Crypto" advocacy group has declared Illinois Senate candidate Juliana Stratton to be "strongly against crypto" solely because she made a statement criticizing the $5.5 million the crypto industry had already spent to oppose her
There are a number of senators who’ve taken a look at this but there seems to be no will to move forward because No. 1, people don’t understand A.I., but because, No. 2, we’ve seen the entry of really big political money tied to A.I. Just like the crypto space, a lot of senators are scared to stick their neck out even though action is being demanded of us on this issue.
Fascinating comment on AI regulation from Elissa Slotkin of all people, who received $10 million — the second-most support — from crypto PACs in 2024.
that’s an unfortunate Google snippet
