An advocacy group’s election scorecard counted 241 pro-crypto winners in the 2026 US congressional races, but the tally does not establish a legislative coalition for the stalled CLARITY Act, and the Associated Press reported that Democrats had won unified control of Congress.
Stand With Crypto (SWC), a crypto advocacy group, released an election scorecard on November 4 showing 222 pro-crypto winners in the House of Representatives and 19 in the Senate, alongside 106 anti-crypto House winners and eight anti-crypto Senate winners. The tally, marked as updated at 9 a.m. ET, showed 384 of 435 House races and 33 of 35 Senate races called; it credited Decision Desk HQ for results and said they are unofficial until certified.
The scorecard uses SWC's own ratings of candidates; it does not give a party breakdown or establish support for a specific bill. The group highlighted several endorsed winners who backed the CLARITY Act. Among them were Mark Messmer (Indiana's 8th District), Riley Moore (West Virginia's 2nd District), and Eugene Vindman (Virginia's 7th District), each of whom voted yes when CLARITY passed the House 294-134 in July 2025. Janelle Stelson (Pennsylvania's 10th District) also expressed support for the bill, according to SWC.
The House passed CLARITY in July 2025 with 216 Republicans and 78 Democrats voting in favor. However, the bill hit a Senate procedural hurdle in September amid disagreements over banking risks, stablecoin rewards and customer protections, as CryptoSlate reported before the election. The scorecard cannot establish enactment or a timetable, and the named winners’ positions do not settle those disagreements.
Otto Jacobsson, CEO of Yap Global, commented in a quote post on November 4 that voters favored crypto while turning against AI infrastructure. He wrote: "America still loves crypto, but hates the physical manifestation of AI."
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The election results give the crypto industry a potential bloc of allies in Congress, but the lack of a party breakdown and the AP's call of Democratic unified control mean the path for legislation like CLARITY remains uncertain.
- The standoff over CLARITY's details, banking risks, stablecoin rewards and customer protections, will likely persist into the new Congress, regardless of which party controls each chamber.
- The quote from Jacobsson highlights a growing divide between support for crypto and resistance to the physical infrastructure of AI, which could shape future policy debates on both technologies.
Background
Stand With Crypto is an advocacy group that rates candidates based on their positions on digital asset regulation. The CLARITY Act is a proposed bill that would establish a federal framework for crypto markets, including stablecoins. It passed the House in July 2025 with bipartisan support but stalled in the Senate in September 2025 over disagreements on key provisions. The 2026 election results will determine the makeup of the next Congress, which will consider the bill again.
Key Perspectives
Stand With Crypto (advocacy group): Its scorecard counts 222 pro-crypto House winners and 19 pro-crypto Senate winners, highlighting candidates who support the CLARITY Act. The group describes its ratings as reflecting support for the industry.
Associated Press (news outlet): Reported that Democrats won the House and unified control of Congress, a finding that could conflict with the industry's legislative goals.
Otto Jacobsson (CEO of Yap Global): In a quote post, he argued that voters favored crypto while opposing AI infrastructure, saying "America still loves crypto, but hates the physical manifestation of AI."
What to Watch
- Whether the new Congress revisits CLARITY and if the Senate can resolve the disagreements over banking risks, stablecoin rewards and customer protections.
- The White House's position on crypto legislation, especially if Democrats retain or gain control of both chambers and the presidency.
- Whether Stand With Crypto's rating system becomes a standard for measuring congressional crypto support or faces criticism for partisanship.