McHenry Says Democratic House Unlikely to Pass Anti-Crypto Bill

Former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry said on Nov. 9 that the incoming Democratic-led House has little chance of passing an anti-crypto bill, arguing that support for the industry now crosses party lines. Democrats won both chambers in the Nov. 3 midterms and take control in January.

Asked about Sen. Elizabeth Warren's renewed push against crypto, McHenry said he did not think it possible to "pass an anti-crypto bill through the House." Warren is expected to chair the Senate Banking Committee when the new Congress convenes.

McHenry, who previously chaired the committee that writes financial-market legislation, described the next Congress as more supportive of crypto in both parties than the Congresses of six and eight years ago. He said the progressive politics Warren has built within the Democratic Party carry less influence now than when Joe Biden entered office with Democrats controlling the House and Senate. Some progressive policies still hold weight, he said, but anti-crypto policies lack the same force.

Why McHenry thinks the votes have shifted

His argument rests on a simple comparison: the Congresses seated six and eight years ago were more hostile to digital assets than the one arriving in January. Democratic control of the House and Senate, secured in the Nov. 3 midterms, does not change that arithmetic in his view.

McHenry also urged the crypto industry to preserve its political support and remain popular with lawmakers. The comment signals his belief that legislative protection depends on sustained lobbying, not on the current partisan balance alone.

What did McHenry say about regulators?

McHenry said Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chair Michael Selig lacks authority over spot crypto markets, where tokens are bought and sold. Congress would need to grant Selig that authority through legislation, he said.

Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins, by contrast, can significantly shape how crypto trades under existing powers, McHenry said. The distinction matters for market structure: an SEC chair can act through enforcement and rulemaking today, while a CFTC chair needs Congress to act first on spot-market jurisdiction.

McHenry added that if a future president replaced regulators with leaders who were not explicitly pro-crypto, Congress could push back, provided enough lawmakers support the industry. That contingency framing ties regulatory risk back to the same variable he stressed throughout: the size of crypto's coalition on Capitol Hill.

He has previously discussed how the industry should prepare for Democratic control while addressing the stalled CLARITY Act in remarks on the bill. The CLARITY Act, a market-structure measure, remains the vehicle through which Congress could resolve the jurisdictional split between the SEC and CFTC that McHenry identified.

The practical question now is whether the January handover produces movement on that bill or leaves spot-market authority with the CFTC unresolved for another session.