Senator Cynthia Lummis Fires Back at Jeff Merkley’s Controversial Crypto Amendment

Crypto just got political—again. Senator Cynthia Lummis isn’t holding back against Jeff Merkley’s latest proposed amendment, slamming it as a threat to innovation. Here’s why the clash matters.

Lummis vs. Merkley: The Crypto Showdown

Wyoming’s pro-crypto senator isn’t mincing words. Merkley’s amendment—seen by many as another attempt to strangle digital assets—just met its fiercest critic. Lummis argues it’s regulatory overreach dressed up as consumer protection.

Behind the Amendment: What’s at Stake?

Details are scarce, but insiders suggest Merkley’s proposal could impose harsh restrictions on crypto transactions. Lummis counters that it’s a solution in search of a problem—one that could push innovation offshore. Again.

The Bigger Picture: Crypto’s Political War

This isn’t just policy—it’s a power play. With midterms looming, crypto’s becoming a wedge issue. Lummis’ rebuttal? A rallying cry for the industry. Merkley’s move? Another case of politicians trying to regulate what they don’t understand—while Wall Street’s old guard quietly profits.

Closing Thought: If history repeats, this amendment will either die quietly or backfire spectacularly. Place your bets.

Senator Cynthia Lummis Airs Crypto Amendment Concerns

Speaking on Capitol Hill on Monday, Lummis claimed that Merkley’s proposed amendment “goes too far” when it comes to legislating the blockchain sector.

Ranking Member @SenJeffMerkley offers an amendment to prohibit ALL federal government officials from promoting or offering cryptocurrency.

“I appreciate their concerns about ethics and transparency in government, but this amendment would inflict serious harm on American innovation and competitiveness,” Lummis said. “And for that matter, it applies to the adult children directly or indirectly of elected and non-elected officials.”

I appreciate my colleagues' concerns about ethics, but @SenWarren and @SenJeffMerkley’s amendment would seriously harm American innovation and competitiveness. If we are serious about ethics, let’s ensure digital assets receive the same treatment as other financial assets. pic.twitter.com/t4GsV04f7x

“If we had passed something like this in the early days of the internet, we would’ve sent a clear message that America’s closed for business when it comes to digital innovation, and that’s what we risk doing now,” she added.

Lummis further indicated that Merkley’s amendment would be misguided and called for broader ethics reform across the financial services industry as a whole.

“The irony is this amendment would actually harm our government’s ability to understand and regulate digital assets effectively,” Lummis continued. “If we’re serious about ethics and financial products, let’s focus on real solutions and all financial products – not just digital.”

President Donald Trump Under Scrutiny For Digital Asset Ties

According to a June 30 X post from Merkley, the amendment would have prevented elected officials from “corrupting” their public position via the sale of cryptocurrencies.

Republicans BLOCKED my amendment to end crypto corruption.

They’re more interested in protecting the Trump family crypto scam than doing right by the American people. pic.twitter.com/ls2FRQBL41

“Every now and then a new strategy creates either the appearance of a conflict of interest or a real conflict of interest and that is the case with the elected officials promoting or selling crypto coins in which they have a personal financial stake,” Merkley said.

However, Republican senators have since shot down Merkley’s proposed amendment.

Current U.S. President Donald TRUMP has been under scrutiny for his ties to the world of cryptocurrencies, particularly in regard to his namesake memecoin, $TRUMP.

However, with the Republican party possessing a fully unified government, it may be tough for Trump’s political opponents to successfully legislate against Trump’s affiliated crypto ventures.