Curtis Bashaw is running to represent the state of New Jersey in the United States Senate. A real estate developer who won his primary with 45% of the vote, Bashaw will face off against Democrat Andy Kim in November.
In August, Bashaw’s campaign announced that the Republican candidate would accept Bitcoin (BTC) donations as part of efforts to “support the new digital financial economy.” Speaking to Cointelegraph in September, Bashaw said he had moved to consider crypto contributions after prodding from his brother-in-law and nephew.
The outcome of the Senate race could affect how crypto policy moves forward in the US starting in 2025. The government body has the authority to confirm presidential nominations to regulators like the Securities and Exchange Commission and pass bills sent over from the House of Representatives.
“I’m a fiscal conservative, freedom-loving guy who’s run a business for 35 years,” Bashaw told Cointelegraph. “I think the idea of us moving into the digital age with a currency that’s tradeable and that’s private and not owned by the government is an important way forward.”
The New Jersey candidate answered ten questions about his views on digital assets and blockchain technology sent by Cointelegraph via email.
Name: Curtis Bashaw
Party: Republican
Running: US Senate, New Jersey
Cointelegraph: What is your stance on stablecoins? Should they be regulated like traditional financial instruments, and if so, how?
Curtis Bashaw: Stablecoins are essential to the future of finance, but they do come with risks.
Stablecoins should be regulated similarly to traditional financial instruments to ensure transparency and security for users.
This means applying rules on how they are backed and how they operate, ensuring they are tied to reliable assets, and enforcing strong anti-fraud measures.
Just like banks, stablecoin issuers should be supervised with regular audits and consumer protection guidelines. This will allow stablecoins to grow without threatening financial stability.
CT: Do you support the development of a CBDC (digital dollar) in the US? Why or why not?
CB: I am against the development of a US central bank digital currency.
A digital dollar would grant the federal government too much control over people’s money, leading to potential misuse of power.
With a CBDC, the government could track and control financial transactions, even freezing or seizing funds without notice.
I believe protecting individual financial freedom is more important than launching a digital dollar.
CT: Stablecoins have been pitched as a way to potentially extend US-dollar dominance by decades. Do you agree with this plan? Why or why not?
CB: I do think stablecoins could help keep the US dollar on top for a long time.
By giving people, especially in countries with strict financial controls, more access to dollars, stablecoins could make it easier for them to use USD for everyday transactions. This would just boost the dollar’s global influence.
On top of that, the market cap for US dollar stablecoins has already surpassed $150 billion and continues to grow, showing how significant this space is going to be.
With smart regulation, stablecoins could be a great way to keep the dollar strong and continue driving the US economy forward.
CT: What role do you believe the SEC and/or CFTC should play in overseeing the cryptocurrency industry?
CB: Congress definitely has a role to play in regulating DeFi, but what we need is clear, consistent rules.
Right now, it’s confusing for crypto founders because one day, something is considered a security, and the next day, it’s not.
Imagine trying to run a crypto project with that uncertainty — it’s tough. Congress should step in to provide clear definitions and guidelines so crypto companies know exactly what they need to do to comply.
It’s not even clear whether the SEC or CFTC should handle crypto, which just adds to the confusion. If Congress doesn’t act, we risk seeing these companies move overseas.
CT: Some traditional banks are beginning to integrate cryptocurrency services. Do you support this trend, and how should Congress approach the regulation of banks that engage in crypto activities?
CB: I do support the trend of traditional banks integrating cryptocurrency services. It shows that crypto is moving beyond its early days as a niche market and is being adopted by more established institutions. Banks getting involved can help legitimize the industry and give customers more secure, regulated access to crypto.
We all know that crypto comes with risks, such as volatility and security issues, which can affect both banks and their customers if not handled properly. We need clear, consistent rules that balance innovation with safety.
I believe that banks should follow the same regulations for crypto as they do for other financial services
CT: Do you personally own any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, and how does that influence your stance on these issues?
CB: I do not currently hold cryptocurrency. However, I look forward to investing in Bitcoin in the future.
CT: Looking ahead, where do you see the future of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technologies in the US over the next 10 years? What role will Congress play in shaping that future?
CB: In the next 10 years, I see cryptocurrencies and blockchain technologies becoming deeply integrated into the US financial system. We’ll likely witness more widespread adoption, with DePIN projects and Real World Assets gaining legitimacy. Banks will increasingly use stablecoins and blockchain technology in their daily operations.
Congress will play a key role by creating a clearer regulatory framework. With more politicians recognizing the importance of crypto, regulation will bring stability and trust, reducing hacks and security issues.
Bitcoin, I believe, will compete with gold as a go-to asset for safety and value preservation.
CT: What is your position on the self-custody of digital assets?
CB: I fully support the self-custody of digital assets. The phrase “not your keys, not your coins” is well-known in the crypto space for a reason.
I believe everyone should have the option to securely manage their own digital assets without relying solely on exchanges or institutions.
CT: What role do you think a candidate’s view on digital assets should have among voters in an election year?
CB: A candidate’s view on digital assets should give people hope. Right now, many crypto investors feel let down by the current rules and regulations.
They want someone who is open and understands the potential of crypto and can bring positive change. We aim to offer that hope — showing voters that we can push for fair and clear regulations.
Voters want a candidate who will support their interests and fight for the future of digital assets in a way that benefits everyone.
Magazine: Crypto voters are already disrupting the 2024 election — and it’s set to continue
