Republican members of the US House of Representatives say the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is seeking publicity and political impact with its anti-crypto strategy.
Representatives French Hill of Arkansas and Dusty Johnson of South Dakota recently written a letter to SEC Chairman Gary Gensler stressing the need for clear crypto guidelines.
“Establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets is a priority for the House Committee on Financial Services and House Committee on Agriculture.
A well-regulated market is essential to ensure that the United States continues to benefit from innovation and growth in markets, services and activities that leverage digital assets and blockchain technology.”
The congressmen then admonish the regulatory body for regulating through enforcement actions, which they say has created confusion. The letters also say that the timing of the SEC’s actions appears to coincide with associated congressional activities, which appears to be deliberate.
“While Congress works to close regulatory loopholes, the SEC has chosen to regulate through enforcement. In addition, the SEC has attempted to regulate digital asset brokers through multiple rules and staff actions.
In fact, Republicans on the Financial Services Committee have sent numerous letters to the SEC expressing concern over various proposed regulations and staff actions. This approach does not lead to compliance and customer protection, but rather creates more confusion, as the recent summary judgment shows.
These concerns are exacerbated by certain Commission actions, seemingly timed to coincide with related congressional activities, which seem calculated for maximum publicity and political impact.
The reps say drafting comprehensive crypto laws would be a better approach for the digital asset industry and consumers rather than arbitrarily chasing companies.
“[The SEC’s] approach does not protect the public. Legislation would do much more to prevent future digital asset company collapses than enforcement action.
A legal framework would establish a process for companies to get into the regulatory parameter and comply with consumer protections, rather than relying on enforcement action to punish a bad actor after the damage has already been done.”
Don’t Miss Out – Subscribe to receive email alerts delivered straight to your inbox
Check price action
follow us on TwitterFacebook and Telegram
Surf the Daily Hodl mix
Image generated: Midway through the journey
