Unchained - Bitcoin Is Just for Libertarians, Right? Two Progressives Disagree - Ep. 698

Episode Date: September 3, 2024

As the 2024 elections draw near, Bitcoin and crypto have become hot topics on the political stage. In this episode, Trey Walsh, host of The Progressive Bitcoiner podcast, and Jason Maier, author of ��A Progressive’s Case for Bitcoin,” explain why they believe progressive values align with Bitcoin. They discuss how Bitcoin can be a tool for social justice and financial inclusion, challenge misconceptions about its environmental impact, and debate whether making Bitcoin a presidential issue in 2024 was premature.  With Elizabeth Warren attacking crypto and the unfriendly environment for the industry under the Biden administration, the guests also highlight that there’s a slight change in the Democratic party, though they are not certain that the Harris campaign will adopt a pro-Bitcoin stance. Show highlights: How Trey and Jason became Bitcoiners What progressivism means to Trey and Jason, highlighting Bitcoin's alignment with social justice and financial inclusion, beyond its typical libertarian associations How Jason and Trey persuade skeptical progressives about Bitcoin Whether they believe that other areas of crypto besides Bitcoin have value  Why they think Bitcoin’s environmental impact is the biggest misconception among progressives Whether Elizabeth Warren’s focus on consumer protection blinds her to Bitcoin as a tool for financial inclusion Why Jason believes pushing Bitcoin as a presidential issue in 2024 was premature Why Trey sees potential hope for pro-crypto policies under a potential Harris administration, despite the hostility of the Biden administration Visit our website for breaking news, analysis, op-eds, articles to learn about crypto, and much more: unchainedcrypto.com Thank you to our sponsors! Polkadot Stellar Mantle Coinbase Guests: Trey Walsh, host of The Progressive Bitcoiner podcast Jason Maier, author of “A Progressive’s Case for Bitcoin” Trump and the Future of Bitcoin, Jason’s op-ed Timestamps: ➡️ 02:06 - How Trey and Jason became Bitcoiners ➡️ 05:14 - Bitcoin, progressivism & social justice ➡️ 11:24 - Persuading skeptical progressives ➡️ 16:19 - Value beyond Bitcoin? Other cryptos ➡️ 21:46 - Environmental impact misconceptions ➡️ 34:36 - Elizabeth Warren & Bitcoin: Consumer protection vs. financial inclusion ➡️ 41:24 - Was making Bitcoin a 2024 election issue premature? ➡️ 55:15 - Potential for pro-crypto policies under Harris? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I don't think that, you know, having Trump represent us as Bitcoiners or J.D. Vance representing us as Bitcoiners makes it seem like approachable or normal or not a scam or not weird. And so I just don't think it's just from an educational point of view. I don't think that that's a good look for us. Hi, everyone. Welcome to Unchained. You're a no hype resource for all things crypto. I'm your host, Laura Shin, author of The Cryptopians. I started covering crypto and I started covering crypto and years ago and as the senior editor of Forbes was the first Main Tree Meter porter to cover cryptocurrency fall time. This is the September 3rd, 2024 episode of Unchained. If you're envisioning ways to make an impact on transforming global systems through blockchain, the Stellar Meridian 2024 conference is for you. Get $50 off your ticket now at meridian.steller.org by using the code unchained pod. Are you looking to level of your crypto? With zero trading fees, boosted reward,

and priority support, Coinbase 1 is your answer. Learn more and get a free month with promo code unchained at coinbase.com slash 1. Mantles Ameth is now the fourth largest LST with $1.3 billion in TVL. M-Eath offers holders cumulative incentives and airdrops in addition to native ETH POS yields. This includes exclusive rewards like Eichen and Cook. Check it out at mith.mantle.xyze slash campaigns. PocaDot is the original and leading Layer Zero blockchain with over 2000 plus developers, and the PocaDot 2.0 upgrade will be a massive accelerator for the ecosystem, making it faster, more secure, and adaptable. Perfect for GameFi and Defi to build, grow, and scale.

Join the community at poca dot.network slash ecosystem slash community. Today's topic is The Progressive's Case for Bitcoin. Here to discuss our Trey Walsh, host of the Progressive Bitcoin. Bitcoiner podcast and Jason Meyer, author of A Progressive Case for Bitcoin. Welcome, Tray and Jason. Thank you. Thank you, Laura. Trey, why don't we start with you?

How did you become a bit coiner? Oh, good question. It was early 2021 when, so I'm a millennial. My background is in nonprofits as well, so I'm not necessarily a very wealthy individual coming into this space and student loan debt and all these very practical things. I had some stocks and investments and things like that. And I'm like, you know, how much longer do I want to keep doing that? Is that going to equal a retirement?

All of these other things. And then I started hearing a little bit about Bitcoin. And it sounded interesting to me at first. I heard about kind of crypto in general. And then I started learning more specifically about Bitcoin's like unique use cases, especially in human rights, permissionless, censorship resistant. And I'm like, oh, this is much more than just an investment or something for me to hold as this speculative asset or this, you know, even a retirement.

And it's all of those things. Yes. But it was so much more as this global money and my background in nonprofits and social justice advocacy and all these other things from training in my career. It got me really, really interested in hearing from folks like Alex Gladstein from Human Rights Foundation. Once that kind of clicked for me, that's when I'd say I probably became a Bitcoiner, if you want to say it that way. And Jason, what about you? Yeah. So I was introduced to Bitcoin originally by my best friend who is, I'd like to say he's the smartest person I know. He's also the weirdest person that I know, and I love them very much. And he said, hey, you should check out Bitcoin. And at the time, I don't think either one of us

really knew much about it, apart from the fact that it was like a speculative of asset, right? The number might go up. But I'm a math teacher by trade. You know, I've been teaching a college and high school math for about 20 years. So as soon as I bought, you know, $20 worth of Bitcoin, I had this like rush of panic. Like, oh, no, if I lose that $20, I'm going to just have to have a awkward conversation with my wife. So I sat down and started to research Bitcoin, so I understood how it worked. And I did that primarily through a mathematics, computer science lens, tried to sort of understand how it works and why it works. And pretty much go through all of the different kind of fud scenarios, like, well, if it breaks, why does it always work, that kind of thing?

So I can just answer questions if they came up. And it was pretty shortly after that that I realized that as I was trying to explain Bitcoin to my friends, and I got this passion for it because I could understand most of the mathematics and most of the computer science behind it, started talking to people that I really care about, and they had these other preconceptions about Bitcoin that were more cultural. And that's how I got down this path of saying, well, I want to be able to give a resource to people that I care about so they can learn about Bitcoin with maybe that speaks the language that they speak. So that's why I chose to write a Progressive case. for Bitcoin because, as Trace said, there's a lot of social justice, there's a lot of transparency,

there's a lot of ways that Bitcoin can intersect with people who are doing really good work in the world. And I wanted to showcase those kinds of things as opposed to maybe some of the Twitter meme culture war stuff that's already out there. And so you both, you know, identify as progressives. And, you know, I'm sure most people know that traditionally in terms of any politics that Bitcoin might align itself with. It's more like along a libertarian bent. So can you both describe for me kind of what you think progressivism is or how you define it personally, like what it means to you? Yeah, I can kick things off. It's a very vague word, right? I'm sure many people have done this. You know, if you type in progressive or progressivism, you get the

Wikipedia page that tells you a deep history of so many different things. And I think, you know, the kind of point of the podcast and my articulation with it, originally, because when I came in in 2021, I saw a lot of education and podcast content and media content on Bitcoin that was very, very libertarian tailored. And this isn't necessarily I'm here to bash on libertarians or anything like that. It was more just me coming from the left and progressive. I'm a New Englander. I'm in Boston area. My friends, my coworkers, all of this, it just didn't seem to resonate with me. There was a lot of things that were discussed that had little to do with Bitcoin and more about a certain political ideology or

religious ideology or family ideology or something like that, right? that wasn't resonating with me. And I kept thinking to myself, what does this have to do with Bitcoin? So for me, it's more about there wasn't as much content that was focused on just what Bitcoin is and also appealing to people. It made it seem like you had to be X to be into Bitcoin, right? Which is just far from the truth, right? It's an open source protocol. You know, you don't have to have any sort of ideology to utilize Bitcoin. Now, with that said, I think there are a lot of things within progressivism where the progressives care about, which I think the majority of progressives would probably start with saying they're socially liberal, right? They care a lot about social values,

like equity-driven things, social justice. They care about equality. They care about like women's health issues, like all of these other things, right? And it's not that that necessarily has to match with Bitcoin, but there's so many things within Bitcoin. I mean, talk about financial inclusion. And that's a huge topic for progressives, like a mistrust of banks and Wall Street and corporations and all of these other things, whereas libertarians might have more of a distrust of the government, right? There's kind of different distrust of authoritarian aspects of our world that we live in from both political spectra. Progressives are much more on the distrust of major corporations of big banks, of these things. So I try to talk about Bitcoin in a way of like,

you don't have to trust these entities, the importance of things like self-custody, the importance of things like anybody can get into Bitcoin. You don't need a bank account or these like predatory loans that have affected like black Americans that have affected marginalized communities. That doesn't apply in Bitcoin. It's permission. You can enter two-day with one Satoshi, which is, you know, what, one-tenth of a penny or something like that, right? So for me, it's all about financial inclusion. And that's how I approach talking to progressives about that.

But in terms of the definition of progressivism, I mean, a lot of it is just forward-thinking, progressing, focused on science, focused on reason, things like that, and less about what I get into, have gotten into arguments with folks about before about, you know, oh, progressives only want as much central authority and focus as possible. That's not necessarily true. A lot of times folks really don't know how our global financial system works. Don't know how energy markets work and grids and things like that when you talk about proof of work mining with Bitcoin.

So a lot of it is education, but a lot of it is just appealing to their social values and things they care about, which are typically rooted in social justice. Yeah, I think Trey gave a really good answer. And I'll just add, you know, there's a long history of people who consider themselves progressive or left-leaning who are totally okay, standing up to authority. or authority structures as they exist, right? So, Trey mentioned, you know, like large corporations or big business is, you know, many people feel like that's just as dangerous as a big government, right? And maybe even more so because they're more nimble and efficient. But I think there's also,

you know, progressive people are willing to stand up and say, you know, keep the regulations off of certain things, right? There's overlap between some liberals and some libertarians, right? Like the entire legal marijuana industry in the United States is completely. completely debanked. And it's a, you know, it's a frustrating experience for people who are trying to do something that's completely legal and give medicine to people. And there's other examples, too. So I feel like there's a, there's a long history of people on the left being skeptical of, you know, large banks. We all kind of know the origins of, you know, thinking about Bitcoin is rising from the ashes of this Occupy movement. And, you know, what, what is that all about?

It's about financial inclusion. It's about certain vectors within our society. having too much power and authority over other people. And Bitcoin is a resistance way to stand up to those people in charge and authority. And the sort of caricature that, well, liberals just want bigger government. And therefore, I don't need to debate you. And I've already made all of my decisions. It's much more dynamic and layered than that. And I feel like Bitcoin does overlap very well with people who need to resist authority however it comes. And so, you know, in terms of like, where does this progressive left of center liberal ideology line up with Bitcoin? It was a natural fit for me.

Like, it made total sense. And then I was shocked to learn at the very beginning of my journey that I was in the really vast minority, people at least in the Bitcoin space or who you see online talking about it. And the values that they project onto Bitcoin didn't match my own. And as a professional educator, I know that people aren't going to learn something that's really complicated and difficult to understand if they don't feel comfortable in the space. There's just no way to learn about Bitcoin if you feel if you feel like you're not welcome or that the things that people are saying about maybe you as an individual or things that you care about are grading against your sense of self. There's no way that you can learn something as complicated and intricate as Bitcoin. So that was really one of the main motivations for me, just how do I teach people? And knowing that in order to teach people about this, they need to feel comfortable in the space.

And so if you were to, like let's say that you meet somebody who identifies as a progressive, but is skeptical that Bitcoin aligns with their ideals. What are the points that you make to say, actually, no, Bitcoin is an alignment with a progressivist view of the world? Yeah, I think that happens a lot, right? I think that there's a lot of, especially going back a couple of years, I think it's gotten a little bit better. But the idea that, well, I'm just going to dismiss Bitcoin out of hand because, A, it's bad for the environment or B, you know, it's like only rich crypto bros are into it. And I'm not, you know, I don't fit that category. So for me, the number one key is to listen and to meet a person where they are, right?

Because I feel like no matter where you fall on the political spectrum, there are things in the world that you don't think are. working properly or working for you or problems. And so if you actually listen to somebody and think about, well, what are the problems that you see in the world? What would you like to see working better? And you get to know that person a little bit. Then you can kind of tailor your message about Bitcoin to how does Bitcoin actually address this or potentially address this, right?

Like Bitcoin isn't this magic wand, right? But if we work towards a solution towards a problem, Bitcoin might be a very good tool for that. So, you know, there was a very classic example in my own life where a co-worker like sort of clutched her pearls and was like, oh, my goodness, like it's boiling the oceans. And there was no amount of conversation that I could have about the actual environmental impact or the benefits of Bitcoin to the environment. I was going to convince her. She had already made up her mind about that. But when I talked about financial inclusion and global financial access and banking the unbanked and allowing women in Afghanistan to like hold assets and actually like,

control their financial destiny, that was something that clicked for her. And every person that I talked to is kind of like a different kind of piece to the puzzle. Like, well, what do you think is going on in the world that isn't right? And Bitcoin, because it is money and it is a new kind of money that has all of these different high quality attributes can be a tool towards working towards that. I like to be very clear. I think Bitcoin as a new kind of money in a financial system is step zero. We still actually require to do work to solve some of these problems. But that work gets easier if you have the better tool in the money that we use. And Tray, what about you?

What are arguments that you use to explain to progressives why Bitcoin's in line with their views? Yeah, I usually start off trying not to sound like a cult. I know sometimes he can. be hard if someone's really, it's not just, it's not just Bitcoin or other cryptos. It's, you know, people can have something that they're passionate about or some hobby or something and you want to just spat off everything, right? There's so much behind Bitcoin that if, if someone is starting at zero and then they learn about this thing that is kind of wildly different because people think, okay, you know, money separate from the state, hmm, sounds a little weird. I've never heard of that before, right? And just understanding these things. So it's starting very

simple. I like starting very specific. Also, my, my day. job is in nonprofits doing fundraising and development work. So I take a lot of that in terms of how do you articulate support for a cause? You start off with a specific story. You pull at a heartstring or you focus on one thing. You don't try to go from all of this data, all of these stories, all this overwhelming history, all at once, all of this, what happened in 1971, getting off the gold standard. You don't start there. Usually start with what Jason alluded to, right? There's a story of this person in Afghanistan, of this human rights activist in Togo. And I usually start of like, okay, you might not need it, right? Especially if we're in the U.S. We have PayPal,

we have Venmo, we have all of these things. You have a safe bank account or you can move banks. You can, you know, all of these things. We have FDIC. We have so much going on in terms of financial privilege in the United States. Not everyone, but a lot of people compared to Lebanon, let's say. So you focus on, you know, do you think that Bitcoin should exist for those that want to use it, right? And you kind of start there. And it's so funny, I was talking with a friend once about the human rights angle and I was talking so much about it. They knew I did a podcast, all this stuff. And then he got back to me one day. He's like, okay, you know, I get the point of like why it should exist. That's great. I'm here for it. But like, how does it work? And I'm like, oh, okay, interesting.

So then I had to flip it and start going into like, what is it backed by? Is it backed by, you know, all of these things of the nuts and bolts of how it actually worked because I hit so hard the point of human rights and why it should exist because there was so much, it's still out there, but less and less so much fud against like the environmental impacts, the, okay, it's just for criminals and terrorist impacts. So I focused heavily on that with friends and with people just through our work with the podcast and progressives in general. Because I'm like, if we can get through that, okay, then we can get into how does it work for those that are interested in things like that? And so I know you to both consider yourself Bitcoiners and

hopefully this isn't too strong of a word, but it seems to me that you kind of shun the wider world of crypto, such as like Ethereum, Solana, stablecoins, defy, Dow's, NFTs, meme coins. And I wondered if you had an opinion on whether or not the rest of crypto aligns with progressive ideals or not. I mean, I'll go. Are we going to get canceled, Laura, for this answer? Yeah, we might.

But I, you know, I think I try to be fair, right? Like, I don't try to be toxic. I understand that everybody's on their own journey. And if they find value in different things, then I do that. That's fine. But for me, ultimately, like, I do see the value of Bitcoin as a new money, as a use of a blockchain that makes sense to me as a way that gives freedom and independence and sovereignty to all people of the world.

And for me, quite simply, like everything else that you just mentioned, maybe there's really positive good use cases there that I don't understand. But for me, it's a really, it's a marketing issue. It's hard for me to get around to the people. that I need to understand about Bitcoin if the first conversation is always like, well, what about FTX? What about this scam? What about this fraud? And I feel like it's just it would, you know, like we can wish for the world we would love to see. Like it would be much easier to sell Bitcoin to people and have them understand the value if they didn't have to wade through all of these other things,

like thousands and thousands and thousands of other things. And a lot of the headlines there are not positive. So I'm not going to universally say that there is no value in cryptocurrency. besides Bitcoin, there might be interesting projects. And, of course, whenever I say that, my Twitter recently comments are like, have you tried out this? Dot, XYZ, have you tried this? Have you tried this? So I'm not saying that there's no use at all.

But I do think that as a marketing tool, like, it makes it harder to sell Bitcoin. And then all of a sudden you have all of these negative things. So maybe there's crypto things. There's tokens. There's NFTs. There's things out there that do. align with progressive ideals. I don't think they do so as permanently and as robustly as Bitcoin does. And it really is an educator. It kind of makes it difficult for me to explain the value of

Bitcoin when people are more focused on, unlike what we would call crypto, right? So I don't try to be mean to anybody. I'm not a maximalist in the terms of like being toxic towards people. I'm willing to hear conversations. But my focus is primarily Bitcoin. I'm Bitcoin first. I'm I'm personally on Bitcoin only. And I just want to get people on board because the current financial system that we have is broken. And that doesn't mean that I can absolutely say there's no value elsewhere in the space, but I just would like to focus on Bitcoin. And Trey, what about you?

Yeah, I would agree with that. I think to the question I usually have for folks is what is the purpose or what is the end goal, right? So for me, like Bitcoin is a tool. It's not the end in and of itself to worship at the altar of Bitcoin and things. things like this, right, that can sound like that online or whatever crypto community, right, that we've seen come and go or the ones that still stick around. So for me, my focus has been on sound money, better money, and dealing with the complications and paradoxes of what sound money standard looks like in our world and those things. And most, if not all crypto projects, just

aren't that. So for me, it's just kind of separating that and not to say, because there are some, like I'm not saying that I think a lot of the SEC action against certain cryptos and things like this has been very overreaching. I'm not one of those Bitcoiners that's like, okay, rule against that, but not against my thing that I like. You know what I mean? And we'll get into the differences as the years go on and play out, but I'm also a bit of a freedom maximalist in terms of like if people want to be interested and engage with those other things, they should be free to. I do think the landscape of crypto, there are quite a lot of scams that have come and gone, right? That I think education should be put out there on that. But I'm not going to say that all

crypto projects are scams. Because I don't, true. believe it. I just think they're different things and different use cases. My focus is better money, and I don't think there's any other crypto project or project out there that has a better and more secure money base and monetary protocol than Bitcoin. So that is my exclusive focus. I try to be a little bit knowledgeable just in crypto because you have certain people engage. And I do think there's a kind of a rich leftist community in certain crypto projects that I've interacted with and not tried to come at from a, you're all wrong, this project sucks type thing, because I understand some of the different,

especially some that are focused on social justice or certain Dow's and things like that. I'm kind of a little bit knowledgeable, but it's also like I just don't know enough about certain other projects. But what I do feel comfortable and knowledgeable of is that Bitcoin is the best money and kind of money standard

and the most decentralized and secure in terms of that. So for me, it's just separating and saying that they're different rather than taking the approach that there's scams, you all should be in prison or something like that, right? Some people should be, and they have been throughout history with different scams and things like that. But back to Jason's point, it does make it a little tricky with education in terms of that. And there are a lot of scams in the landscape, but not all of them are scams. I guess that's where I stand up. Yeah. Well, so you've been speaking a little bit about how you come across a lot of misconceptions

around Bitcoin, especially for people who, amongst people who are similarly minded to you politically. So what are some of the most common misconceptions you come across from your own fellow progressives? And yeah, and how do you counter that? Yeah, I think number one still remains and has been for a while, the environmental impact. And I feel like a lot of people on the left, right, and I count myself in that group, especially before, you know, I really started learning about Bitcoin deeply, you feel like, well, if I learned something as bad for the environment, then I can dismiss it out of hand. I can also pat myself on the back because I've done a good thing by saying something bad about something that is like energy wasteful, right? Like there's a little bit of rush of serotonin when you're like, all right, like, I did the right thing.

Like I made somebody feel bad about using energy. And I feel like that's a really complicated, difficult thing to educate somebody on because like how energy grids work and how energy works in general. and what is a Bitcoin miners role in that, for example, is really complex, right? And so it's not just like a bumper sticker where the fud that gets thrown at us is a bumper sticker. It's like, well, it's bad for the environment. And that's all most people really have to hear before they just dismiss it and don't consider it again. That was my first reaction to the guy who tried to orange pill me. Like, I thought you were an environmentalist, dude.

Like, you're this hippie-dippy dude who loves the trees and stuff. Like, why are you into Bitcoin? And then it just takes education. So I feel like that's the number one thing. I do feel like, you know, some people who have spent a little bit of time thinking about it sort of while you're just trying to overthrow the government or something like that, right? So like it's a more, I guess that's at least a little bit more of an interesting conversation to have. But I think those are the most common things.

And then apart from, I mean, just going back to the last point, like when the FTX scandal broke, like, you know, I had people coming up to me saying, Like, well, I heard the president of Bitcoin just got thrown in jail. You know what I mean? Like, so there's just like people who really don't understand how the industry works, right? So I feel like those are the big things. Or just a complete lack of awareness of how the system works to begin with. And then those very specific fud points that, you know, get tiresome. But remember, like, even though it's the 100th time you're having the conversation,

it might be the first or second time they're having that conversation. So you have to keep an open mind and meet them where they all. are. And so I do think there are a lot of people in D.C. who listen to this show. And so you kind of glossed over like what arguments you would actually make. But I'd like you to act as if we are people who are skeptical. So how do you persuade somebody that the environmental impact isn't bad or that Bitcoin isn't going to overthrow the government? Trey, do you want to start? Do you want to try or should I keep going? Why don't you go with the environmental point? Keep keep going on it. I can jump in in and support.

So I think the first thing that is important is to disabuse yourself of the notion that using energy is bad. You know, we used energy all over the place for lots of good things too. And nobody's complaining about like incubators and hospitals using a lot of energy, right? So just to understand the use case is important and all of the things that we've been mentioning, financial inclusion and banking the unbanked and all of that stuff is actually a pretty good use case. One. two, all energy isn't sort of, you know, say, created equal, right? Like, energy is produced at a very specific time at a very specific location and can't really be transported.

And what Bitcoin allows us to do is to take some of the renewable energy that a lot of progressive people would like to see that isn't really financially viable because it's in a location and being generated, you know, whether the sun is shining or the wind is blowing at a time and a place where it can't really be used by a populace. So what Bitcoin can do is incentivize the build out of that, sort of be a bridge between the creation of that renewable energy and a demand on the other side for it. And then also understanding that, you know, Bitcoin miners are completely location agnostic. So they're using wasted energy. Like they are, a lot of Bitcoin miners are using or trying to use energy that would have been completely

wasted otherwise, right? Just thrown into the ground and not use, but Bitcoin miners can step in and use that. They can also turn, they're completely responsive within a moment's notice to demand from the rest of the grid. So if we are overbuilding solar and wind and other renewable sources of energy, hydro and things like that, and we're creating more energy than we need, then the Bitcoin miners can step in and actually supplement and pay for that electricity in ways that helps the generators of that energy. But if there's a demand for that energy, they can turn off immediately and actually give energy back to the grid that they don't need to take on in that moment. So it's a lot more complicated than that. You know, it's the longest chapter in my book because it's such an important piece of

fud. And rightly so, I think it's a really, it's actually a very important thing to ask, like what is the environmental impact? But the using stranded and wasted energy, building out renewable energy and being completely demand responsive better than any other industry on the planet are all important pieces of that energy piece. And I feel I just need to encourage people to keep learning about how the energy is produced, stored, transmitted, and used. Yeah.

And to add to the environmental piece, kind of a specific example that Jason was mentioning is the project gridless, which is a company that operates in Kenya and, throughout different parts of Africa now and they're continuing to expand. And I think a lot of it is just education that to expand renewable energy projects and expand electricity around the world, which a lot of people want to do. It's one of the best ways to combat poverty is to give people electricity. You have to have a way to pay for that and afford that, right? It's not like, we need to just do this. It's like, okay, how is that sustainably funded? Because someone is going to need to get paid, whether it's the contractors, the electricity company, the people building

these little microgrids, it costs money. Whether that's government and investment or private, but also when we're at an age where government debt is ridiculously high in most places, including the U.S., the answer can't always just be the government needs to build this project with no way to fund it or no way to sustain it, right? That's something that, so this is a way to sustainably financially and literally sustainable energy grow these projects. So for gridless, for instance, they'll go into a remote village that has a very, very small need for electricity. So a lot of times companies won't go out and do this because it's just not worth it to actually build the equipment that's needed to provide electricity. There's not enough

demand for this village of 50 to 100 people. But with Bitcoin, they can use, you know, the village will use 20% of that energy. The Bitcoin miners will use the other 80%. And it actually makes it profitable. And it's still ridiculously cheap energy. It's ridiculously cheap for folks to actually run refrigerators in their homes and lights at night and cooking and all of these other things. So Bitcoin miners are actually a way that they can sustainably roll out electricity throughout Africa and build kind of energy grid. So it's these really, really cool things that on the surface, it doesn't make much sense. If you say Bitcoin helps electrify Africa, it's like, okay, let's give some specifics here.

So those are projects that, you know, they've done a short film and all these other things. It's really great. And I also think, you know, you mentioned D.C. And there's a lot of groups like Bitcoin Policy Institute is probably number one down in D.C. They're actually working with lawmakers and folks to explain a lot of this stuff. but one of them that's huge is national security. So the mix of national security and combating crime. Because a lot of my friends will say it's either we, you know, I've talked about the scam piece, which you can say, okay, Bitcoin's a protocol. Then there might be companies or

people that are scammers. That's different. So separating that difference is actually fairly easy mentioning that. The tougher part a little bit is talking about crime and that people can use Bitcoin and can use crypto to facilitate crime. And I think you have to start with the acknowledgement that crime has been using cash and US dollars for a very long time now to facilitate criminal activity. So you have to start off and say, what level of crime are we okay with? Right. So some people are just like, we have to eliminate all of that. And it's like that is that is impossible. First of all, the Bitcoin blockchain is transparent and open. Right. So it's actually really, really easy to track criminal activity through through Bitcoin. There are a lot of ways that criminals and

enterprises would actually mess up with whether it's their privacy preserving tech or something like that, it makes it a lot easier to track than cash in a lot of ways. Right. So you have to compare it, just like the energy use. Like how much energy does Bitcoin use compared to traditional banking? You have to compare and contrast to people. And I think that's a really helpful tool when talking to people. So it's like, okay, how much criminal activity does cash facilitate? Well, it's actually a lot more than Bitcoin than crypto in general, but especially Bitcoin because Bitcoin is quite transparent in terms of the blockchain. So that's usually one that we kind of talk a lot about. And I know a lot of folks in D.C. are having a lot of concerns and questions. Rightfully so about

how can how can Russia get around sanctions? What about North Korea? All of these things. Those are very active conversations happening. And I think there's a lot of arguments that we can say that actually this transparent blockchain is not a good use of facilitating massive criminal operations compared to offshore banking accounts compared to cash compared to all of these other things. I usually start with that one as well. All right. So in a moment, we're going to talk a little bit about how this has all become an election issue and how that plays into, you know, what's going to happen this fall. But first, a quick word from the sponsors who make this show possible. Steller invites you to join the discourse at the sixth edition of Meridian, a Web3 conference hosted by the Stellar Development Foundation

in London, England, from October 15th through 17th, 2024. Meridian is where developers, builders, policymakers, and business leaders, convene to discuss the present and future of everything from tokenization to defy. Get $50 off your ticket now at meridian.stellar.org by using the code unchained pod. Coinbase 1 is the ultimate crypto membership, now with a community of 400,000 worldwide. With Coinbase 1, you enjoy zero trading fees, up to 5.6% APY on USTC, 24-7 priority support, and exclusive partner deals. Coinbase 1 members also get higher reward rates on Solana, Cardano, Cosmos, and Tazos, earning even more while putting their crypto to work. Experience it free for 30 days with promo code unchained at coinbase.com slash 1. Mantle LSP is a permissionless and non-custodial ether liquid

staking protocol deployed on Ethereum and governed by Mantle. Emmeth serves as the value-accumulating receipt token of Mantle LSP and is now the fourth largest ETH LST with $1.3 billion in TVL. In addition to native ETH POS staking yields, M-Eath holders can access various yield opportunities across DAPs on Mantle Network L2 integrations and more. M-Aidth holders have previously received over 1 million in Icon token air drops. With the upcoming October 24 launch of Cook, the new governance token of Mantle LSP, M-Eath holders can start accruing powder rewards under season one. metamorphosis, which will be convertible to cook. Visit mith.mantle.xyz slash campaigns to learn more.

Pocod is the original and largest layer zero blockchain with over 2,000 plus developers, and the anticipated Pocodot 2.0 upgrade will be a massive accelerator for the ecosystem, upgrading the infrastructure with eight times higher transaction throughput and twice as fast block times, perfectly tailored core time for the needs of every protocol, Trustless bridges internally and into Ethereum, Cosmos, Near Binance Smart Chain, and revised tokenomics and the implementation of a token burn to reduce inflation. Perfect for GameFi and Defi to build, grow, and scale with one of the most active crypto communities in this space.

PogoDOT recently announced a partnership with mythical games, bringing top games like NFT rivals with over 650,000 players and 43 million transactions to pave the way for GameFi and the Pocod ecosystem. Get your Web3 ideas to market fast with economics that work for you. Think big, bills bigger with Pocod. Join the community at Pocodot.network slash ecosystem slash community. Back to my conversation with Trey and Jason. So, yeah, the whole reason we're having this show is because suddenly we're seeing that Bitcoin and crypto is just part of this election discourse in a way that I think a lot of people didn't expect.

And I was curious. So, Trey, you mentioned you're in New England. I was curious if both of you considered Elizabeth Warren a progressive, and if so, you know, why do you think she's anti-Crypto? Yeah, that's a great question. Sure, I guess we could consider her a progressive. I think there's a lot of ways that progressives in some of the focus the past decade has been a little bit divergent from, I think, the things that are very, very important.

So there are many different folks that can consider them to sell as a progressive, and it can vehemently disagree with Elizabeth Warren. And one of the things is, you know, from the great financial crisis in 2008, I think Elizabeth Warren was laser focused on consumer protections and did a lot of good things in terms of banking regulation. But I think her single issue of consumer protection has blinded her to the potential of, I'll focus on Bitcoin, but again, legislation-wise, you shouldn't be against crypto in the way that she is. And right now, when DC it's Bitcoin and crypto together, or digital assets in general,

that policy, and I get why we're focusing on it in that way. But I think Elizabeth Warren is focusing so much on consumer protection that it's completely blinding her to the benefits and really fixated on one data piece that now was outdated about environmental concerns or fixated on what I just talked about, where, well, criminals can use Bitcoin. It's like that's like 0.1% of the transactions out of the 99% of law-abiding normal people using crypto for, you know, remittance payments and all these other things. So hyper-focusing on things, not in an analytical or research-backed way, when this is a person who's a very, very educated law professor. And so these things are just, they don't match. And the only way I can think of it as just laser focusing on one thing

and deciding that's her cause, that's her thing. I mean, even, what was it last year, saying she's going to build an anti-crypto army and making that the focus. When we've seen, there's so many different projects and reports out on crypto ownership, but now from the Nakamoto project on Bitcoin ownership, the largest category of people most likely to own Bitcoin from this survey of about 3,300 people. Apologies, Troy Cross. It should be about that number. We're actually very liberal was the highest category of people who are likely to own Bitcoin. So in terms of ownership of Bitcoin and crypto, it spans the political spectrum and quite a bit with liberals and progressives. And perhaps that could be a little bit around urban city centers,

New York City, Boston, San Francisco, places like this. But in general, people, have kind of moved on with Bitcoin and crypto. And I think my frustration lies in progressives talk about financial inclusion, talk about the working in middle class. Inflation has just affected everyone. It continues to be harder and harder to afford things. Young people, millennials and Gen Z, have taken that into their own hands to go into Bitcoin, crypto, stocks, whatever the case, because politicians and governments have not been making it easier for folks to actually afford daily living. And so Elizabeth Warren not doing due diligence in terms of, I think, helping things be more affordable for folks. And then also saying, I'm also going to be against

your off ramp to help you actually get ahead in life or to build a retirement. It's just a double whammy that I really can't stand by anymore. And so I think I'm really hoping the senator makes some sort of pivot at some point. I mean, of Jamie Diamond can, perhaps Elizabeth Warren can, but I'm not holding out too much hope right now. So I don't think she's being very progressive these days in terms of that and is very blinded on consumer protection. I must protect people from the big bad boogeyman of crypto. And it's kind of ridiculous and everyone knows it at this point. Yeah. And I'll just add to that because, you know, I'm in Connecticut. So I'm not a constituent of Elizabeth Warren, but I am next door. And yeah, I just think that the easiest way to explain it to tack on

what Trey said, which is like, well, she's hyper-focused on consumer protection. And I think it's crypto in general might be a very easy target if that's your concern. I think it's just a political miscalculation. You know, like a couple of years ago, it was very easy to like bash on this new kind of money and new kind of digital asset, didn't make any sense, was bad for the environment used by criminals, right? It was just like that was the narrative a few years ago when Elizabeth Warren started talking about it. And it was just a political miscalculation. And once you kind of get, get down that road, you're kind of captured by your audience. So I don't know that she deep in her soul has any animosity towards crypto. I think that it was a political position that she like staked out. And,

you know, she hasn't been punished for it yet, right? So it's like the job of like people like, Trey and me to say like, well, we need to educate the voters and either force Elizabeth Warren to pivot, which seems unlikely, but possible, certainly is possible, or to get somebody else elected to represent the state of Massachusetts that does actually do all of the great things that Elizabeth Warren does. She is a progressive person who will fight for social justice and women's reproductive rights and, you know, social equality and all of those things, get somebody in there who will do that and also appreciates Bitcoin as a digital asset and will put common sense regulations about the crypto industry into practice as opposed to this sort of fear mongering political calculus

that I just don't think pans out. Yeah, and I want to add to that really quick. I think there's a younger generation. It's such a generational divide. I think we're seeing this with lawmakers. There's many younger Democrats that are getting quite frustrated. Even Chuck Schumer is getting quite frustrated being in New York and being like, listen, we're not taking action for years and years now, and we're being beat out. Like, China might beat us out. Other places might beat us out. Focusing on that, there's a lot of younger Democrats. Like, it's not enough to just say, well, Elizabeth Warren is a champion for reproductive rights and for, you know, working in middle class. Like, that's any Democrat at this point. And that is a lot of younger Democrats that are also going to be like, hey, we are into

Bitcoin and Crypto for financial and And we want you to, we want to support the industry, we want to support people who want to hold, hold their own Bitcoin. You know, we're very supportive of this. We get it. We're younger. We're, you know, we're technology forward, all this. So Elizabeth Warren's going to have to decide.

Does she, she's seeking out another term this year. In all likelihood, she's going to be reelected in terms of Massachusetts and the support. The next cycle, though, after this, I'm not so sure. So her time is kind of coming short unless she's going to pivot on this or most likely retire and take some sort of advisory position or chair position. somewhere is my opinion. I don't think she'll be very active in the Harris administration, but perhaps that's a whole other conversation. So obviously in this election cycle, we have

seen Donald Trump really take up the mantle of both Bitcoin and crypto at Bitcoin 2024. He pledged numerous things to court the crypto vote, including firing Gearing Gensler on day one. as chair of the SEC, he promised to shut down operation choke point 2.0 to come up with crypto regulation in the first 100 days, defend the right to self-custody, which that's a big deal, create a framework for stable coins, and he also, you know, jumped onto this bandwagon of, you know, having this strategic Bitcoin reserve. And since you are progressives, I wondered what it was like for you to watch him do that and what your reaction is to his promises.

Yeah, I'll start very briefly. I was on the same stage as Donald Trump on the same day at Bitcoin 20204. And it was kind of a surreal moment because I was on stage with Congressman Roe Kana talking about how progressives and Congress can work towards a Bitcoin future. And then I was on stage with Wiley Nicol, who's a Democrat congressman from North Carolina talking about how progressives can work towards. a Bitcoin future, and the entire audience was there to see Donald Trump. So it was actually a pretty interesting moment. I think that on one hand, it is great to have any person seeking office to be aware of and to know the talking points and to be able to talk about crypto and Bitcoin specifically in an intelligent way. I think that in many ways, RFK Jr. did that very well a year before.

and, you know, he was at Bitcoin 2023. And he did, you know, he gave a very lovely speech that really indicated that he knew at least, you know, surface level, level one, level two about Bitcoin and how it works and how it could actually make the world a better place. I'll note that Donald Trump hasn't said the word Bitcoin, really, since Nashville, you know, Bitcoin 2024. I think that... He released an NFT collection, so...

Yeah, yeah. I know. I guess. Yeah, so like his one mention of Bitcoin, and again, this goes back to the other question about crypto versus Bitcoin. But I, you know, in my own personal opinion, I just don't feel like he's genuinely interested in Bitcoin as a resource to make the world a better place. I do think that he sees it as a political issue that needs to be talked about and maybe can get him some money to his campaign or get him some votes in November.

You know, having said that, I'll just say that my sort of vision and hope of like the progress and education and the political standing of digital assets and Bitcoin specifically is essentially like we're probably not ready for mainstream viable presidential candidates to be discussing this. I think that I would much rather see a ground up approach like have people start locally, educate your peers, educate voters, educate Congress people, state legislators and move on, move up. And I think that, you know, and I've said this in other spaces, that Donald Trump was at Bitcoin, 2024, talking about Bitcoin and crypto, because he was encouraged

to do that through campaign contributions by a very few number of highly influential people. And I feel like that was an unforced error for them, for those people in the Bitcoin and crypto industry to really push home the point in 2024 and force Donald Trump to kind of have this position where I think Bitcoin is a perfectly reasonable presidential issue in like 2032 as we build up this ground support. So I feel like it was an unforced error to make 2024 the crypto and Bitcoin election. And quite honestly, I don't see it playing out in a positive way, at least Donald Trump's support for Bitcoin specifically in a positive way for him or for Bitcoin. So I have mixed feelings. Like obviously as I started, like it's not bad necessarily to have a viable presidential candidate

talking about these things. But, you know, if my main concern about educating people about Bitcoin is, well, what about all of these frauds and scams and scandals in the crypto space? Adding Donald Trump to the conversation does not help my cause at all. Because the people that I care about, view him as a con man and a grifter and all of those things. So it's really a marriage. It's it's inconvenient for me as an educator of Bitcoin to have to field questions from that angle also. And just to understand your point a little bit, you were saying that you felt that it would have been better if it had gone up in a more grassroots way or like lower level kind of elected officials and then reach the presidential stage in two election cycles.

And is that simply because you wanted more kind of a groundswell of support amongst the population before before it got to that? Yeah, I think that if you're trying to get like Bitcoin or even crypto to be like a viable, popular thing that people are starting to understand and appreciate in a political space, having it be a top down issue where we're just going to go to Donald Trump and say, well, here's $100 million. You like Bitcoin now is not a sustainable. way to do it because if he doesn't get elected or if he gets elected and then somebody else

gets elected, like it just changes, right? But educating voters and educating people in local politics is a much more sustainable way to gain support for, let's just say, the crypto industry, right? Like the people making statewide legislation, countywide legislation, people representing their congressional district, that's much more effective in terms of like a long-term progress than having somebody who's at the very, very top just all of a sudden to decide, you know, on a Tuesday that they're in favor of Bitcoin because on Monday they were behind closed doors with a bunch of Bitcoin miners who promised them money. So I just feel like it's more sustainable to do it from the ground up. Now, if that's one election cycle from now or two,

you know, but I don't know. But the point is like we needed more education among the populace before we had like a top-down approach. And what do you make of the fact? Well, a couple of things. First, the fact that I guess roughly in the ballpark of 50 million Americans already own crypto. So, you know, that's like one in six Americans and a higher percentage of the voting electorate. And then on top of that, J.D. Vance, he appears to be like an actual bit-oiner. So I don't know what your reaction is to both of those statements. Yeah, I'll just respond quickly. And maybe Trey has some thoughts, too. I think that it's great that lots of people own Bitcoin and Trey mentioned in crypto in general,

but Trey mentioned the Nakamoto project where there was a survey about Bitcoin specifically. And it's important, right? Like it's actually maybe a moment where we can do a little bit of lobbying because we're a large enough group to pay attention to, but a small enough group to be nimble and like we can influence elections without upsetting too many people. like the five and six who don't own crypto aren't going to get upset if we kind of make a little bit of noise. I just think it should be from the bottom up or to maybe think a little bit more carefully about who our representatives are. Every time that there's a negative Trump article in the New York Times right now, and you might have opinions about the New York Times, but a lot of people who I want to get into Bitcoin read the New York Times,

like it's him standing in front of Bitcoin, right? And I don't think that, you know, having Trump represent us as Bitcoiners or JD, Vance representing us as Bitcoiners makes it seem like approachable or normal or not a scam or not weird. And so I just don't think it's just from an educational point of view, I don't think that that's a good look for us. And it's not as if maybe J.D. Vance certainly came to Bitcoin on his own possibly or educated himself over a long period of time. But certainly trumped in it. It wasn't like he came to Bitcoin naturally. And just choosing saying, we want. this to be the face of Bitcoin is as an unforced error, I think, because it's going to make it

hard for the other half of America to get behind it. Yeah, the way I view it too, and I talked with Lynn Alden about this on my show recently. Lynn has a way of stepping back when so many of us are just so in the moment on something, whether it's online or whatever, and just remembering, too, online is the two 5% extremes of either side. And then most Americans are kind of in the middle, just trying to, they're focusing on daily life. And then they hear some things here and there. Like Jason mentioned, they might see Trump in front of Bitcoin into New York Times quickly as they glance on their Apple News and then they're like, ah, that's scam. And then move on. It's like, oh, man. So the way I focus it is risk mitigation,

right? I think those of us in Bitcoin, in crypto, we didn't get into Bitcoin or crypto because we thought the government has it all under control. And things are just perfectly great. These are different systems where these are kind of parallel systems to help, whether it's to help make the U.S. and other countries more viable, like the El Salvador experiment or others that believe the U.S. should have the strategic stockpile or to help your own individual family situation or saving situation or business situation, right? I think it's all about risk mitigation. And so what Len and I had talked about is really just you don't want to see Bitcoin adopted by only one side, right? Because that's how draconian laws get passed. There was a super majority in Congress when they

pass the gold ban, the Gold Confiscation Act from FDR, right? We don't want to see something like that for Bitcoin or crypto. So for me, yes, I am a progressive, someone from the left. I'm also not a single issue voter. So I think some people might be voting for Trump because they think that is our best option to have the Bitcoin price just absolutely pump and other issues aren't as important to me. Well, for me, I'm not a single issue voter when I approach that, right? So we're in a bit of a in between a rock and a hard place right now where Democrats, there's some signaling, maybe things could change or I think Kamala Harris, should she become president, is going to be more open to things compared to Joe Biden's administration. But what does that look like? Is Gary Ginsler

are still going to be active? Is Elizabeth Warren going to be even more active? Is it going to be pro the industry, but still a lot of kind of weird tax policy, you know, a backdoor ban on self-custody? We don't really know yet. I'm feeling a little bit more hopeful. So I understand why folks, especially Bitcoin industry leaders, bitcoiners, people in crypto that have had this kind of relentless attacks or just wondering, can I even do business in the U.S.? Why they look to Trump or see that and say, well, he's not trying to ban my livelihood or my industry or whatever. But also, Trump has a track record of not really following through on a lot of things to begin with. Looking at even the, and again, this is the issue I care about, but like reproductive rights

and abortion rights, some would say Trump, a lot of the evangelical vote that he garnered in 2016, he's kind of backing down from his stance on abortion and saying, I won't pass, you know, nationwide abortion bans and things like this, which I think are great. But a lot of of those voters at the time, he courted them saying, I will do so. Right. So he flipped on that issue. And I'm just using that as an example. Obviously, I'm against nationwide abortion bans and things like this as someone from the left. But Trump very likely, and it's very obvious to see he's just courting votes, courting massive amounts of money. I think in terms of making Jason and I's lives a little bit harder in educating the left, there is a portion of that. But the things I like to

see, like for instance, even if it's like Cynthia Lumas or Ted Cruz, right, again, Ted Cruz is arguing from a fact of I have a lot of Bitcoin miners in my state of Texas. That feels like a little bit of a more organic support, right? He has industries in his state. He's a senator for that state. He'd like to support his industries or sent the alumus same thing in Wyoming. Those kind of, that's a bit of, obviously, that's not really grassroots, but it's not quite as top down. It's more organic like congressional members of Congress and senators supporting industry in their states, in their communities, getting closer to passing law.

So I think the best we can hope for is bipartisan support in Congress. Congress and going from there. I just don't want to see draconian laws passed against Bitcoin. I don't need a Bitcoin king as president. I just would like to see that the U.S. is a place where it could be neutral or pro policy and that industry folks, you doing this podcast, whatever, can just continue to do that and continue to thrive in the way we're doing things. That's my hope. And I think the jury's still out at this moment, even though I'm feeling a little bit more hopeful, but it's still tough to know how it's going to play out. Just really quickly, I think that it's important to note that Trey mentioned risk mitigation. And certainly, you know, like we're in this sort of new industry that there's

lots of risks. And, you know, I've been saying as often as I can that, you know, courting Donald Trump to be pro-Bitcoin is a reputational risk. Like, what it means is that it makes it harder for the other five out of six people who don't own crypto to even get into it. You know, maybe some of those people are already pro-Trump. And I do get the sense that there's Bitcoiners. out there who are saying that they're single-issue voters who are only voting for Trump because they support Bitcoin. And my suspicion is that if you dig into each one of those people, they're probably going to vote for Trump anyway. And that's just a really convenient, like, excuse to say, oh, well, I'm a single-issue voter. I really like Bitcoin. But they were going to vote for

Trump anyway. So I think the reputational risk is something that's really important, right? As somebody who cares and wants to get as many people on the lifeboat as possible and to understand that there's a new technology that can make the world a better place, the last. thing I need is somebody having another reason to dismiss it out of hand without thinking about it. Well, so Trey mentioned this a few times that he was hopeful about Kamala Harris, but that it's really a big question mark. So, you know, there was recently this crypto for Harris town hall. And, you know, it seems just if I'm reading, you know, your statements that both of you do not want to vote for Trump. And yet, it is obviously, you know, extremely well documented that the

Biden administration has not been friendly toward Bitcoin or crypto, you know, in terms of approving the Bitcoin ETFs, they really were forced to you by a court, and very begrudgingly so. And I just wondered, like, maybe you're, maybe you're hearing more things, you know, do you have a sense of what Kamala will do? Just generally, because I know, attended this town hall, how did you come away feeling about what she potentially could be promising? Yeah, I think very practically, very realistically. I think the jury is still out, but I'm leaning a bit more on the positive side, meaning I don't think that right out of the gate we're going to see. This is just my own opinion. And I know Will and many of the other organizers for Crypto for Harris,

they're awesome people. They're trying to do really good work. They're just grassroots organizers as well. So I know people have said, well, you have to make their tell Kamla's campaign policy. This is not. It's like the crypto for Harris thing was kind of, they're very skilled political operatives. I don't mean that pejoratively. I just mean they've worked with different packs and campaigns and things like that before. They're very knowledgeable of this political game we have in the U.S. For better or for worse.

But they are not attached to the Harris campaign. We're trying to amplify the message of Bitcoin and Crypto is something that you should have on your radar. And there's an expectation that you all will do things differently because it hasn't been going great. the past few years in terms of the type of BS that the industry has had to deal with, that we shouldn't, right? First of all, I would say the court seemed to be working well, which is good. That is one of my hopes is that I think a lot of the things that have been proposed and put out into the ether, even some of Elizabeth Warren's legislation and things like that

that aren't gaining too much traction, but still exist, which is concerning, these kind of backdoor bans or these kind of like, you know, extra taxes on Bitcoin miners and things like that. I don't think these things will hold up in court. But again, we don't like to see that. We don't like to see that proposed. So in general, I don't think we're going to see the Harris campaign come out and say, I'm 100% pro-Bitcoin pro-crypto when this is. But I do think there's a bit of a shift in the Democratic Party specifically. So again, I mentioned Chuck Schumer. There's so many others. There's at least about a dozen members of Congress, Rocana being one of the best that are really actively from, you know, San Francisco, from New York, saying we are pro-Bitcoin.

We're pro-Crypto. We're pro-innovation, pro-Bitcoin mining, all of these things. That is things we haven't heard in the past a year or two. Those are sending signals. Chuck Schumer coming on the crypto for Harris call, reading office script saying, we want to get legislation passed by the end of this year. We'll see if that happens or not. I think there might be a little bit of a chance probably right after the election, but early 2025, I think that's definitely on the tables. We'll see what's actually in that legislative. but these are things that were not even whispered two years ago from the Democratic Party. So I think it's a bit of, you know, viving off the Republican Party, yes, but it's even more so

members of Congress and their constituents and businesses and packs that are donating to both sides of the aisle that are getting very, very impatient. And lawmakers and Chuck Schumer really knowing we don't have any more time left, we need to get some things done on this because the expectation is that America is a leader on technology and we'll look pretty silly if we fall behind in the world. So I'm feeling more hopeful in that regard. In terms of the Harris admin, we still don't know who those key players are going to be for Treasury,

for SEC, for others. I think once we get more information on that, like if Gary Ginsler sticks around, if others, we'll get a sense of how much more we need to ratchet up the complaints to Congress and things like that. So Congress, I think, is moving in a very positive direction. Her administration, I think, the job, jury still out. I know there's been some general vibes from an advisor saying, we're going to be

pro tech industry and that kind of stuff, meaning crypto. We need a little bit more in my opinion. But again, hats off to the crypto for Harris people. I know they're trying to best to amplify this message. Yeah. And I'll just add, I think that, you know, what happens every four years is that we have this disproportionate concern over the very top of a presidential ticket, right? And we know that, you know, the reality is that presidential candidates say a lot of things, but when they're an officer, either unwilling or unable to affect, like, a lot of the policies that they really wanted to do, right? So this happens all the time. And having a strong coalition in Congress, having the Senate majority leader of the U.S. Senate say positive things about digital assets and crypto and Bitcoin

is ultimately way more powerful than what's happening in, like, a presidential election. election, even though the presidential election just sort of sucks all of the oxygen out of the room, right? All of the attention is on Trump and Kamala Harris, right? Like, that's who we want to know. What are you going to do? What's going to happen with your policies? And Trump will say things like, well, I'm going to fire Gary Gensler on day one, even though that's like illegal to do. And like, there's more, it gets more complicated than doing that. Um, you know, but I'd much rather trade in, you know, five presidential candidates for like one Senate majority leader, um, or, you know, 20 Congress people who are representing their congressional districts and have formed a pro-crypto,

pro-Bitcoin coalition. So I think that, you know, it goes back to my earlier point. Like the very top of the executive branch is important, but I think that we do misplace a lot of the importance and it's a disproportionate amount of energy dedicated towards, well, what's this certain specific person's policy on that when they have to deal with a judicial branch and a legislative branch that feels differently than them. So I feel like it's important to keep that context in place as we make our choices. And you know, like you said, like I'm not, I make no illusions.

I'm not voting for Trump. I think that Bitcoin is going to be just fine under either president. I don't trust that Trump will keep his promises. And I feel like, you know, even if he is saying nice things about Bitcoin. And I care about a lot of other things too, right? Like the peaceful transition of power and, you know, the social equity and justice that I want to see in the world is. also important to me. And I think Bitcoin will be just fine under either president. And especially if we see, as Trey noted, all of these positive movements in our elected representatives at the congressional

level, that's important also, maybe even more important. Yeah. And just one minor correction. I do think Trump can fire Gary Gensler as the chair. He just can't fire him from the SEC overall. Sure. Fair enough. Yeah. Well, so, last question, I guess, would just be, if you were to make a pitch to Kamala Harris' team about Bitcoin or crypto, what would you say? What I'd want to see specifically, I think in regards to policy, because I think a lot of policies that could be against self-custody, against Bitcoin mining or taxing them unfairly, like energy use, things like that, I do think they're illegal and they're more constitutional

crises, that doesn't mean we should get close to that point or attempt fate with that. But in terms of policy, I would like to say just a reiteration of self-custody that people can hold their own Bitcoin crypto. Like this is the point of it. Self-custody, you don't have to rely on this middleman. You don't have to rely on a bank. Prioritizing and not going against proof of work mining, like Bitcoin mining, is really beneficial.

And also do not go after open-source developers that are working on privacy tech. working on open source development, like America is a leader in software development, open source development technology. So do not go after them unfairly in terms of kind of criminally prosecuting folks that are working on. I mean, we've seen kind of attacks on this all over the world now with telegram as well. So that's kind of the world that I'm more concerned about is like attacks on privacy, attacks on people using their own property in this case, Bitcoin or crypto. So I'd want to see, can you just reaffirm for your voters for the 50s? 50 million crypto holders for the large industry worldwide that you are not going to combat this.

And hey, if you end up being even more supportive, that's great. But for me, it's kind of the low-hanging fruit of like, can you just establish and reaffirm that Americans continue to be law-abiding Americans and follow our constitution and be able to protect these things because there's been some members of the party, like Elizabeth Warren, actively combating these things are going against it. And I do think that's illegal. But I'd really just like to see the Harris admin saying, we are moving on from that, and we're taking the power away from folks like Gensler, from folks like Warren, who do not even speak for and represent progressives on this issue, the people that actually hold crypto and Bitcoin, we're moving away from that. I think we're seeing that shift for that,

but that is my pitch is that, listen, we're not looking for favoritism. We're not looking for you to say all of these, all of these things that even Donald Trump is saying about, you know, pro-Bitcoin, and we're not looking for Kamala coin and for her to launch her own NFT and this and that. You know, we just want to reaffirm some basic protections of self-custody. proof of work mining, and I say this is a Bitcoiner, and developers, that this is a safe and thriving atmosphere for people to work on development, work on freedom tech, work on Bitcoin and crypto. That is what I'd want to see. And that would be my pitch. I'd probably try to frame it more eloquently and work with some policy gurus on this, but that's my pitch.

Yeah, I agree with everything that Trey just said. I would actually be very disappointed if I saw Kamala coin show up. That would be from her campaign. But I think, it's just, it's really, it's that. If you have a neutral stance as sort of a legislative body and your policy issues to say people are allowed to use their assets how they want, people are allowed to buy electricity fairly at a market rate that makes sense without being taxed just because of how they're using it. These are, these are just really all we need. And Bitcoin will be just fine. And so my pitch to the Kamala team, the Harris team, would be the same pitch I have to my coworkers that I'm going to go see in a couple of minutes, which is keep learning about Bitcoin. It's a

lifelong endeavor. And there's a lot of benefits and a lot of ways that Bitcoin can help us make the world a better place. So keep learning. As much as you think you know about Bitcoin, there's always more to learn. So, you know, stay out of the way. Common Sense legislation. Protect some consumers, for sure, but allow people to use the assets how they want and keep learning. I think that's the key. All right. Well, this has been a great discussion where can people learn more about each of you and your work? So my book, A Progressive Case for Bitcoin, you can see me on Twitter at Cjason Mayer,

or you can check out my website, Bitcoinprogressive.com. And you can check out our podcast. We drop new episodes every Tuesday, but ProgressiveBitcoiner.com or the Progressive Bitcoin or wherever you get your podcast and on YouTube, and we're across all social channels, X and things like that. I'm also active on Noster, for those maybe five in your audience

that will know what Nostr is, decentralized social media. active on theirs. But go to progressive bitquiner.com. You can also get in touch with us through our website. No, I'm sure most people know what Noster is. So, um, all right. Well, thank you so much for joining us today to learn more about Trey and Jason and how progressive ideals align with Bitcoin. Check out the show notes for this episode. Unchained is produced by me, Laura Shin, without from Matt Pilcher, Wanner Ranovich, Megan Gavis, Pam Meshemdard, and Marka Curia. Thanks for listening.

Unchained is now a part of the Coin Desk Podcast Network. For the latest in digital assets, check out markets daily five days a week with host Noelle Atchison. Follow the CoinDesk podcast network for some of the best shows in crypto.