At a time when public confidence in government is already hanging by a thread, Congress should be doing everything possible to strengthen trust, not weaken it.
As lawmakers debate the CLARITY Act, legislation that would establish new rules for cryptocurrency markets, much of the conversation has focused on innovation, investment, and regulatory certainty. Those are important discussions. But before Congress creates the rules that could shape the future of digital finance, it has an obligation to answer a much simpler question: who benefits from those rules?
The American people deserve to know that the laws being written in Washington are designed to serve the public interest, not the personal financial interests of the people writing them.
That principle shouldn’t be controversial. Public office is a public trust. It is not an investment strategy.
Yet today, Americans are watching a situation unfold that raises serious questions about conflicts of interest. Donald Trump and members of his family have built substantial ties to the cryptocurrency industry while his administration and congressional allies advance policies that could directly impact the value of those investments. Whether through crypto ventures, digital assets, or related business interests, the potential for personal financial gain is impossible to ignore.
The concern goes beyond appearances.
Reports have highlighted major foreign investments into cryptocurrency ventures connected to the Trump family, including investments tied to interests in the United Arab Emirates. At the same time, the administration has made policy decisions affecting those same international relationships. Even if no laws are broken, the overlap creates exactly the kind of questions that erode public confidence in government.
Americans should never have to wonder whether a policy decision is being made because it is good for the country or because it is good for someone’s portfolio.
That is why ethics guardrails must be part of any cryptocurrency legislation Congress considers.
The CLARITY Act should include clear prohibitions preventing members of Congress, presidents, vice presidents, senior executive branch officials, and their immediate family members from owning, promoting, or financially benefiting from cryptocurrency ventures that are directly affected by federal policy decisions. Those safeguards should apply regardless of party, ideology, or who occupies the White House.
This is not about being anti-crypto. It is not about opposing innovation.
California has demonstrated time and again that innovation and accountability can go hand in hand. In fact, innovation succeeds when people trust the systems that govern it. Clear rules, transparency, and strong ethics standards create the stability that allows new industries to grow responsibly.
The same should be true here.
Senators Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla have consistently argued that public service requires putting the public interest ahead of personal interests. As Congress continues its work on cryptocurrency legislation, they should insist that ethics protections are included in any final package.
If lawmakers truly believe the CLARITY Act serves the public interest, then they should have no problem ensuring that neither Donald Trump nor any future president can personally profit from the policies it creates.
Because the question facing Congress isn’t whether cryptocurrency deserves regulatory clarity.
The question is whether the American people deserve confidence that their government is working for them.
The answer should be yes.
