Indiana Lawmaker: Crypto Bills Must Diversify Beyond Bitcoin
Crypto Bills Shouldn’t Be Bitcoin or Bust, Says Indiana Lawmaker
Indiana State Rep. Kyle Pierce said a cryptocurrency bill he introduced earlier this month was drafted to be intentionally broad, aiming to support the wider digital asset market rather than elevating any single token.
In comments to Decrypt, the Republican lawmaker said the approach was both a matter of principle and political practicality. “I didn’t want to get in this situation where someone can say, ‘Oh, you’re choosing winners and losers,’” Pierce said, adding that his goal is “to promote the cryptocurrency market, not Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tether, or whatever it may be.”
Pierce also said the bill would prevent Indiana from targeting crypto miners, framing the measure as part of a broader effort to ensure the state’s policies are not written around one asset or one segment of the industry.
The push comes as many U.S. policy debates around digital assets have centered on Bitcoin, particularly at the state level. Pierce’s position is that while Bitcoin was the first cryptocurrency, legislative initiatives should avoid being “Bitcoin or bust” and instead be structured to accommodate innovation across the sector.
Indiana’s effort is unfolding alongside a larger and more complex federal policy fight over crypto market structure. In Washington, lawmakers are still negotiating a major framework bill often referred to as the Clarity Act. Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott (R-S.C.) has delayed a committee vote until next year to allow bipartisan talks to continue, and White House Crypto and AI Czar David Sacks said in a recent post that senators have confirmed a markup is expected in January, though no date has been scheduled.
According to reporting cited in the source material, the bill’s timeline is tightening as the election year approaches, with the risk that legislative momentum slows as members shift attention toward campaigns. The broader debate is also being shaped by regulatory questions over whether the Commodity Futures Trading Commission or the Securities and Exchange Commission should play the leading oversight role for crypto markets.
Other federal proposals discussed in the same policy environment include changes to crypto taxation. Ideas cited include applying wash sale rules to crypto and introducing a mark-to-market accounting election for active digital asset traders, as well as separate efforts pushed by Sen. Cynthia Lummis to adjust tax treatment for miners and stakers and to advance other crypto-related legislation.
Together, the state and federal developments highlight a central policy tension: how to craft rules that support the growth of digital assets without appearing to favor specific networks, products, or business models—and how quickly lawmakers can move before the political calendar makes consensus harder to reach.
