Forbes Digital Assets reported on June 18 that political spending from the cryptocurrency industry is moving aggressively into the 2026 U.S. primaries, especially in Democratic races where the winner is often effectively decided before the general election. The article centers on the Fairshake network, funded by Coinbase, Ripple, and Andreessen Horowitz, and its Democratic-facing arm Protect Progress. According to the report, the issue is not whether the spending exists; Federal Election Commission filings show it does. The harder question is whether voters can see the connection between the money behind the ads, the candidates’ public records, and the industry interests that stand to benefit from future digital asset legislation.
Protect Progress Puts More Than $4.9 Million Behind Adrian Boafo
One of the article’s main examples is Maryland delegate Adrian Boafo, a Democratic candidate for Maryland’s Fifth Congressional District, where retiring Representative Steny Hoyer is leaving an open seat. Federal Election Commission filings detailed by Forbes show that Protect Progress has spent more than $4.9 million to support Boafo in a crowded Democratic primary. The ads supporting him focus on keeping ICE out of local policing, standing up to Donald Trump, and addressing the cost of living. They do not mention cryptocurrency, even though the funding comes from a crypto-backed super PAC network.
Journalist Joy Reid, formerly of MSNBC and now host of The Joy Reid Show, criticized the spending this week and described it with the term “blackwashing.” As summarized by Forbes, Reid used the phrase to describe an industry funneling money through a group with a progressive-sounding name to support Black candidates in Black districts, while the ads speak about broad political and economic issues and omit the industry behind the political action committee writing the checks. Forbes said the basic point is supported by the filings: the funding is disclosed, but it is disclosed on paper at the Federal Election Commission, and only voters who search for those records will see it.
The Forbes article also corrected one part of Reid’s framing. Reid suggested that Boafo had been a crypto lobbyist. Public records cited in the article show something different: Boafo has been a registered in-house lobbyist for Oracle since 2021. Oracle is a cloud and enterprise software company, not a crypto industry firm. As a description of his paid employment, Forbes said “crypto lobbyist” does not hold. At the same time, the article noted that Boafo’s Oracle work did not appear on his campaign website at the time of writing.
Boafo’s Public Crypto Record and the Oracle-ICE Issue
The correction does not remove Boafo from the crypto-policy debate. Forbes wrote that his ties to crypto come from his own public record, not from being a paid crypto lobbyist. As a state delegate, Boafo sponsored House Bill 470, which created Maryland’s Digital Asset and Blockchain Technology Task Force. Governor Moore signed the bill into law this spring. In a 2025 post promoting the effort, Boafo wrote that blockchain is the future and urged Maryland to become the national leader in blockchain technology and crypto. In Forbes’ framing, the ads obscure the funding source, not the candidate’s views: Boafo is one of Maryland’s most openly pro-crypto legislators, and the industry is spending to amplify a candidate who already agrees with it.
Another dispute involves Boafo’s work for Oracle and the company’s connection to ICE. Lobbying disclosures show that, as an Oracle lobbyist, Boafo represented the company before the Department of Homeland Security during the years when Oracle fought for and, in late 2022, won a cloud-services contract with ICE. This sits beside campaign ads that promise to keep ICE out of local policing. The Lever surfaced the record, while also noting that the filings are too vague to tie Boafo personally to that specific contract. Boafo’s campaign presents him as a consistent opponent of ICE.
Rushern Baker, a former Prince George’s County executive and one of Boafo’s rivals, has publicly asked how voters can trust Boafo to stand up to Trump’s ICE while he works for a company tied to ICE operations. Forbes also cited The Lever’s reporting that Boafo initially left his Oracle stock off a state ethics form before amending the filing to include the holding. He later revised a 2024 filing to acknowledge Oracle’s business with Maryland’s port authority and health benefit exchange. Boafo has said he handled only federal matters for Oracle and kept a firewall between his public role and private employment.
Crypto Money Appears on Both Sides of Black Democratic Races
Forbes argued that the Boafo race is part of a larger pattern. The same Fairshake-linked network has spent heavily on a roster of pro-crypto Black candidates. In Texas, more than $5 million from Protect Progress helped Christian Menefee, age 38, defeat 78-year-old Representative Al Green in a Houston-area runoff. Forbes described that contest as the most expensive House primary in the state. The ads in that race focused on generational change and did not mention cryptocurrency. In Georgia, roughly $4 million helped Jasmine Clark win an open primary.
The article stressed that the network has also spent against Black Democrats when those candidates are critics of the crypto industry. It spent millions to defeat Al Green, who is Black, because he was a strong crypto critic, voted against the GENIUS Act, and accused the industry of trying to control Congress. It has also spent against other Black Democrats it views as hostile, including Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton. Forbes’ conclusion from these examples is that the dividing line is not race. It is whether a candidate is aligned with the industry or opposed to it, and Black candidates appear on both sides of the money.
That distinction matters because many of these districts are overwhelmingly Democratic. In such seats, the Democratic primary often determines who goes to Washington. Forbes cited Pew Research Center data showing that about 83 percent of Black voters identify with or lean Democratic. The article described a repeated template: a pro-crypto contender receives industry-backed amplification, the ads emphasize kitchen-table topics, and the industry behind the spending is not named in the message that most voters see.
The CLARITY Act Raises the Stakes in Washington
Forbes tied the primary spending to legislation now moving through the Senate. The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act is a market structure bill that would divide oversight of digital assets between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, while setting rules for the industry. The bill cleared the Senate Banking Committee on May 14 in a 15-9 vote and was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar on June 1, awaiting a floor vote. Only two Democrats joined every Republican in advancing the bill out of committee: Arizona’s Ruben Gallego and Maryland’s junior senator, Angela Alsobrooks.
Alsobrooks is also an original cosponsor of the GENIUS Act, the stablecoin law signed in July 2025. She brokered the stablecoin-yield compromise with Republican Thom Tillis that moved the Clarity Act out of committee. Alsobrooks has endorsed Boafo and appears in his campaign ad alongside Hoyer and Maryland Governor Wes Moore. Forbes noted, however, that her record does not fit a simple description as a crypto industry loyalist. She fought to add consumer-protection language to both bills, cosponsored the End Crypto Corruption Act, and said her committee vote was only a vote to keep working in good faith, not a promise to support the bill on the Senate floor.
Maryland’s other senator, Chris Van Hollen, provides the contrast. He sits on the same committee and voted no on the Clarity Act, as he had on the GENIUS Act. Forbes wrote that his objection is not to the technology itself. Van Hollen has proposed stronger rules on illicit finance and disclosure. He also pushed for an ethics amendment that would have barred senior government officials from holding crypto business interests while in office. That amendment failed 11-13, leaving the fight unresolved as the legislation heads toward the floor.
Outside Money Becomes the Issue in Maryland’s Fifth District
In Maryland’s Fifth District, Forbes said the money itself has become a central campaign issue. The seat is open for the first time in 45 years, and roughly two dozen Democrats are running. Over the weekend, three of Boafo’s leading rivals set aside their own contests to protest the roughly $8.8 million in outside money supporting him. Those rivals were Harry Dunn, the January 6 officer endorsed by Nancy Pelosi; Quincy Bareebe, who is largely self-funded; and Rushern Baker. Forbes said most of the outside money came from the crypto super PAC and an AIPAC-aligned group.
The three rivals called on Hoyer, Moore, and Alsobrooks, all of whom endorsed Boafo, to press him to reject the outside spending. Boafo’s campaign responded that he has opposed such spending for years and is being misrepresented by his rivals. Forbes also pointed to the industry’s own scorecard, Stand With Crypto, which rates Maryland Democrats Anthony Brown and Kweisi Mfume, along with Van Hollen, as strongly against crypto. In the article’s framing, the industry is not amplifying a typical Maryland Democrat; it is spending to support an exception.
The final argument in the Forbes piece is that the underlying problem is corporate money in politics. The article said Reid’s “blackwashing” label captures one part of the situation: progressive-coded money backing selected candidates in Black districts. But it also warned that the term can push the discussion toward technology and race when the deeper issue is the role of corporate money in elections. Crypto is described as the most aggressive current example of that broader concern. The industry’s political machine reshaped the landscape in 2024 and has turned to local districts because the winners of those primaries will cast votes on the CLARITY Act and related bills.
Forbes closed by drawing a line between crypto technology and the industry’s political spending. A decentralized ledger is not a super PAC, and defending one does not require defending the other. The question being tested in the 2026 primaries is narrower than a slogan: whether voters in heavily Black and Democratic districts can know, before they vote, who is funding the candidate on the screen and what that candidate’s record actually says. The ads alone do not provide those two facts.