Based on previous comments, Tina Smith has indicated they are very anti-cryptocurrency. Below you can view the tweets, quotes, and other commentary Tina Smith has made about Bitcoin, Ethereum, and cryptocurrency innovation.
The only people doing well right now seem to be AI executives, crypto bros and the Trump family.
Aaron Rupar
@atrupar
CNN: Other than gas prices, when are other cost of living prices going to come down?
REP. LISA McCLAIN: Listen, we have a massive hole that we need to dig out from from the last administration
CNN: But this administration is 9 months in and Trump promised to lower prices on day one
Analyzing Senator Tina Smith's recent tweet.
Lumping "crypto bros" in with political adversaries is a rhetorical tactic that paints the entire digital asset industry with a broad, negative brush. The term itself is a pejorative stereotype that dismisses the millions of developers, entrepreneurs, and ordinary users working to build a more open financial system. This type of framing suggests that participation in crypto is inherently suspect or aligned with a particular political tribe, rather than being about technological innovation.
This statement is consistent with Senator Smith's broader record, which demonstrates a significant opposition to the crypto industry. For instance, she voted against repealing SAB 121, an SEC staff bulletin that severely hinders the ability of regulated custodians to hold digital assets for customers. She also repeatedly voted against the GENIUS Act, a bill designed to create a clear regulatory framework for payment stablecoins—a critical step toward both consumer protection and US leadership in digital finance. Instead of supporting this effort for regulatory clarity, she framed it as a partisan issue.
When a public official uses dismissive language and consistently opposes bipartisan efforts to create clear rules, it signals a fundamentally anti-crypto position. Such actions stifle innovation and push the industry to jurisdictions with clearer guidelines.
Took stances on a bill between May 20th, 2025 and Jun 17th, 2025
Bill Name
GENIUS Act
Details
The GENIUS Act of 2025 proposes a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins. It defines permitted issuers (insured depository institutions, their subsidiaries, and approved nonbank entities) and mandates 1:1 reserve backing with specific high-quality assets. The bill outlines federal and state regulatory oversight options, sets requirements for customer asset segregation, and grants stablecoin holders priority in insolvency proceedings. It also clarifies that regulated payment stablecoins are not considered securities or commodities under various acts. The bill designates issuers as financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy Act, requiring compliance with AML, KYC, and sanctions regulations to prevent illicit finance and safeguard national security. It also reinforces U.S. leadership in digital finance by supporting innovation and ensuring the dollar remains competitive in a rapidly evolving global financial landscape.
Timeline
May 20th, 2025
Very Anti-Crypto
Voted against - Because of the way Senate rules work, GENIUS could not have gotten to a final vote without members voting in favor.
Jun 12th, 2025
Very Anti-Crypto
Voted against - Because of the way Senate rules work, GENIUS could not have gotten to a final vote without members voting in favor.
Republicans are jamming through the GENIUS Act which will turbocharge Donald Trump’s crypto corruption.
We need an amendment vote to stop the President, Vice President, and senior government officials from directly or indirectly profiting from a stablecoin venture.
The GENIUS Act should not pass without a vote on this fix.
A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Internal Revenue Service relating to "Gross Proceeds Reporting by Brokers That Regularly Provide Services Effectuating Digital Asset Sales".
For congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission relating to "Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121".
This staff accounting bulletin expresses the views of the staff regarding the accounting for obligations to safeguard crypto-assets an entity holds for platform users.
.@SenTinaSmith (D-Mn.) on crypto regulation following FTX’s collapse: “We know how to basically provide a fair market for consumers and we need to make sure those standards are being applied where we can in the crypto world.”
Crypto mining uses a ton of energy (more than some entire countries), further exacerbating climate change. Now neighbors who never asked to live near crypto miners are seeing local pollution and their energy bills go up.
Listen to @Ben_Mckenzie from yesterday’s FTX hearing.
It’s not hard to conclude SBF bulldozed over market rules because he thought nobody would stop him.
Let’s be clear: we need strict protections for consumers, shielding them from blatantly corrupt actors in crypto.
The New York Times
@nytimes
Breaking News: U.S. prosecutors unsealed their criminal indictment against Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, charging him with fraud and conspiracy.
Read the latest.
nyti.ms/3VMq6qZ
Crypto sellers are already flagrantly disregarding consumer protection laws.
We need strong consumer protections on crypto so we don’t risk Americans’ retirement savings disappearing overnight.
Moving Crypto into 401(k)s is far too risky, and this week’s rollercoaster ride shows why. Inserting risky assets into retirement portfolios is a recipe for disaster.
washingtonpost.com/business/2022/…
Investing in cryptocurrencies is a risky and highly speculative gamble, and @Fidelity's plans to allow Bitcoin investments in Americans' retirement savings plans are a big mistake.
@SenTinaSmith and I want answers.
wsj.com/articles/sen-e…
Incredibly, Facebook seems to have decided now is a good time to revive their cryptocurrency and digital wallet efforts.
It is not and never was. Proud to join my colleagues in pushing back on this.