Charles Hoskinson, the founder of Cardano, recently delivered a scathing critique of U.S. cryptocurrency regulatory policy during an appearance on David Gokhshtein's show, "The Breakdown." He specifically highlighted the proposed "Clarity Act" as potentially catastrophic for the cryptocurrency industry.
Hoskinson argued that the bill is fundamentally flawed, primarily by defaulting most crypto assets to be classified as securities, which he believes would stifle innovation. He stated bluntly, "This bill is essentially a rubber stamp for what Gary Gensler is doing." Hoskinson further emphasized that even major cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Cardano, and XRP would struggle to meet the bill's potential scrutiny standards.
He criticized the bill for granting excessive power to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) while leaving the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) underfunded. Hoskinson expressed concern that the bill would leave developers in the decentralized finance (DeFi News) space unprotected and could force emerging projects to "go overseas" to countries with more favorable regulatory environments.
"Don't pass this bill, let us continue to win in court," Hoskinson urged lawmakers to reconsider.
Furthermore, Hoskinson questioned the legislative process behind the bill. He suggested that leadership from figures like David Sacks was insufficient to ensure the bill's thoroughness, and that key institutions such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) were not adequately involved in the 137 amendments. He claimed the bill ignores global regulatory coordination and could instead make the U.S. the worst country for cryptocurrency.
Hoskinson also used the opportunity to criticize the Trump administration's unfulfilled promises regarding cryptocurrency, contrasting them with the Biden administration's policies and suggesting the "Clarity Act" continues some of the latter's direction. He even likened certain military decision-making to "lies," criticizing their high costs and potential for disastrous outcomes.
He stressed that the U.S. should not pursue regulatory paths that hinder innovation and development but should instead seek more forward-thinking and inclusive policies.