Welcome back to The Breakdown with me, NLW.

It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world.

What's going on, guys? It is Friday, September 20th, and today we are talking about all sorts of

legal wranglings and government panels and all sorts of that stuff. Before we get into that,

however, if you are enjoying the breakdown, please go subscribe to it, give it a rating, give it a

review, or if you want to dive deeper into the conversation, come join us on the breakers discord.

You can find a link at the

show notes or go to bit.ly slash breakdown pod. Hello friends. Well, on Wednesday, the House Financial

Services Committee assembled a panel of industry experts and academics to discuss the wisdom of

the SEC's crypto enforcement policy. Entitled, and perhaps giving you a sense of the framing from

the people who set this up, dazed and

confused, breaking down the SEC's politicized approach to digital assets, the premise of the hearing

was extremely clear. French Hill, the chairman of the Digital Assets Subcommittee, explained that

the, quote, pro-regulatory framework views of the majority and many bipartisan does not mean

we're going against the SEC going after bad actors, or modernizing existing rules to incorporate digital asset securities or other unique instruments.

We're against SEC enforcement abuse and making it hard for legitimate actors who are trying

to follow the rules to do a fine job and bring innovation and technology to our markets.

Michael Liftick, a former SEC deputy chief of staff, gave testimony that, quote,

the SEC has refused to issue new rules or meaningful guidance relating to digital assets

and at the same time has engaged in whackamol enforcement that the SEC holds up as a replacement

for rulemaking. Rather than being an epicenter of financial innovation, as it should be,

and as it is in other contexts, the U.S. has turned itself into a crypto-no-fly zone.

...