A Adam Arafat. WA-10 Congress
← Watchtower

Four Crypto Industry Bills. 35 to 37 Percent Democratic Support Each. Pre-Vote Contributions From a16z, Robinhood, Coinbase, and Uniswap Founders.

Representative Strickland voted yes on four crypto-industry bills where most House Democrats voted no. The Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act, known as FIT21, in May 2024, passed with 35 percent Democratic support. The Congressional Review Act repeal of the Internal Revenue Service rule on decentralized-finance reporting in March 2025, called the IRS DeFi CRA, passed with 37 percent. The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, known as the CLARITY Act, in July 2025 passed with 37 percent. The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, known as the GENIUS Act, passed the same day. In the cycle leading up to those votes she received documented contributions from Robinhood co-founder Baiju Bhatt, the founders of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz (also known as a16z), Uniswap chief executive officer Hayden Adams, and Coinbase chief executive officer Brian Armstrong. Stand With Crypto, the crypto industry's own advocacy organization, grades her 'strongly supports crypto.' The Washington State Attorney General has documented 266 Robinhood complaints from Washington consumers and 665,000 dollars in consumer relief.

Last build: 2026-08-02 Sources cited: 14 Graded claims: 9
By Adam Neil Arafat Candidate, WA-10 info@arafatforcongress.org About Reported and verified with the Vanguard Civic Technology Research Team. Open-source forensic doctrine (Sherman Kent / ICD 203 / NATO STANAG 2511).
Short Four Crypto Industry Bills. 35 to 37 Percent Democratic Support Each. Pre-Vote Contributions From a16z, Robinhood, Coinbase, and Uniswap Founders. 04:47
Listen options
Transcript Download
TLDR

The incumbent voted YEA on four crypto industry party-break bills.

Cryptocurrency market screen and coin representing crypto policy votes

Between May 22, 2024 and July 17, 2025, the U.S. House of Representatives held four crypto industry party-break floor votes. On all four, Strickland voted YEA. On all four, House Democratic caucus support was under 40 percent. Three of the four were within a single 14-month window. All four passed. 7 Source: See the linked receipts below.

FIT21, the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act, HR-4763, House roll call 118-h-2024-226, passed 279-136 on May 22, 2024. Democratic caucus support: 35 percent. Strickland: YEA. The bill restructured federal crypto regulation, shifting jurisdiction between the SEC and CFTC and creating a framework that industry advocates argued was clarifying and SEC chair Gary Gensler argued was deregulatory.

IRS DeFi CRA, House Joint Resolution 25, House roll call 119-h-2025-71, passed 292-132 on March 11, 2025. Democratic caucus support: 37 percent. Strickland: YEA. The resolution nullified Treasury / IRS rules requiring decentralized finance crypto brokers to report gross proceeds of digital asset sales.

DAMA, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (HR-3633, the CLARITY Act), House roll call 119-h-2025-199, passed 294-134 on July 17, 2025. Democratic caucus support: 37 percent. Strickland: YEA.

GENIUS Act, S-1582, the stablecoin regulatory framework, House roll call 119-h-2025-200, passed on July 17, 2025, the same calendar day as DAMA. Strickland: YEA.

36 House Democrats voted YEA on all three of FIT21, IRS DeFi CRA, and DAMA. Strickland is one of 36. The bloc includes House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (CA-33), Ro Khanna (CA-17), Ted Lieu (CA-36), Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05), Raja Krishnamoorthi (IL-08), Jake Auchincloss (MA-04), and the chair of the New Democrat Coalition Suzan DelBene (WA-01).

The Federal Election Commission Schedule A line items for Strickland for Washington (committee C00732826) document pre-vote contributions from the founders and CEOs of the companies whose business models depend on these four bills.

Baiju Bhatt, co-founder of Robinhood Markets Inc, contributed $5,000 to Strickland on December 11, 2023. The contribution was made through two FEC Schedule A line items the same day: $1,700 and $3,300. The FIT21 vote was 5 months and 11 days later. Robinhood's business model includes crypto trading. The Washington State Attorney General has documented 266 consumer complaints against Robinhood resulting in $665,000 in Washington consumer relief. 9 Source: See the linked receipts below.

Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), the venture capital firm whose portfolio includes Coinbase, Uniswap, and most of the largest crypto exchanges and protocols, made coordinated contributions to Strickland in the 13 to 19 days before FIT21. Marc Andreessen contributed $1,666 on May 9, 2024 (13 days pre-FIT21). Ben Horowitz contributed $1,666 on May 3, 2024 (19 days pre-FIT21). Chris Dixon, the a16z partner who leads the firm's crypto investing, contributed $1,668 on May 9, 2024 (13 days pre-FIT21). The three founders' combined $5,000 was the only pre-FIT21 a16z contribution to any House Democrat. Suzan DelBene received the same $5,000 a16z cluster but post-FIT21, in August 2024. 5 Source: See the linked receipts below.

Hayden Adams, the founder and CEO of Uniswap Labs (the company behind the largest decentralized exchange affected by the IRS DeFi reporting rule), contributed $3,300 to Strickland on August 14, 2024, between the FIT21 vote and the IRS DeFi CRA vote that followed. 6 Source: See the linked receipts below.

Brian Armstrong, the founder and CEO of Coinbase (the largest U.S. crypto exchange and a primary backer of Stand With Crypto), contributed $3,300 to Strickland on September 30, 2024, also between FIT21 and the IRS DeFi CRA vote. 6 Source: See the linked receipts below.

William Shihara, the former CEO of Bittrex (a Seattle-area crypto exchange that received an SEC Wells Notice and ultimately filed for bankruptcy in 2023 after SEC enforcement action), contributed $3,300 to Strickland on March 20, 2023, with additional contributions in prior cycles. Bittrex's WA-state regulatory exposure preceded the contribution pattern. 6 Source: See the linked receipts below.

Stand With Crypto, the crypto industry advocacy organization backed by Coinbase and a16z, grades Marilyn Strickland 'Strongly supports crypto' based on six tracked votes. The grade reflects four YEA votes in favor of crypto legislation (FIT21, IRS DeFi CRA, CLARITY/DAMA, GENIUS Act) and two NAY votes on bills the industry opposed (SAB 121 CRA on May 8, 2024 and CBDC Anti-Surveillance). The grade is the industry's own characterization of Strickland's record. The grade matches the voting record. The funders match the founders. The industry's own advocacy organization endorses her based on the votes she cast.

What would change this story. If Strickland's office documented a public-interest rationale for the four YEA votes that predates the pre-vote contributions (a policy speech, committee testimony, or constituent-listening session referencing the specific bills), the contribution-then-vote timing becomes less suggestive. If the a16z founder-cluster's pre-FIT21 contribution timing was matched at scale across other House Democrats not in the 36-member trifecta bloc, the targeting framing weakens. If the Washington Attorney General's 266-complaint Robinhood enforcement record predates Strickland's first crypto vote and was disclosed to her office as a constituent issue, the 'constituent harm went unrepresented' inference is harder to sustain. None of those three has surfaced in the public record. The campaign is publicly inviting the office to provide them.

The accountability question follows from the record. Strickland is not the only House Democrat in the 36-member trifecta bloc. She is one of 36. The bloc is the story. The Stand With Crypto endorsement is the industry's own characterization. The 266 Washington consumer complaints against Robinhood and $665,000 in WA consumer relief is the constituent-harm anchor. The a16z founder contributions in the 13 to 19 days before FIT21 are documented to the day in FEC Schedule A. The vote record is documented in House Clerk roll call XML. The contributions and the votes are both publicly disclosed. The proximity between them is in the public record. So is the distance between Strickland's voting pattern and the majority of her own Democratic caucus. 795 Source: See the linked receipts below.

Receipts

Methodology & Sources Open source record checks, assumptions, and ratings Open

Watchtower applies open-source forensic doctrine to every Ready story. Sources are graded; competing explanations are tested; the assumption that could break the story is named; what would falsify it is listed.

Estimative Probability

The public-record chronology, contribution record, vote record, or oversight gap described in this story is accurately stated within the release frame.

The claim depends on cited public records and story methodology, not nonpublic evidence or motive inference.

Analytic Confidence
MEDIUM-HIGH

The receipts and methodology identify the public records used. Motive, illegality, coordination, and private intent remain outside the release claim unless separately documented.

Linchpin Assumption

The cited public records support the chronology, vote record, contribution record, or oversight gap described in the evidence block.

Falsifier

A primary record correction, missing material public filing, or contrary official response shows the chronology, vote record, contribution total, or oversight gap is materially misstated.

Analysis of Competing Hypotheses
  • less supported

    The documented pattern reflects ordinary constituent, committee, or party behavior rather than improper influence.

    The story does not need to prove improper influence; it presents the public-record pattern and asks for accountability or explanation.

  • plausible

    Additional office correspondence or committee records provide a benign explanation for the public-record sequence.

    That possibility is preserved through the correction path, source-dispute process, and update log.

  • plausible

    The story should be narrowed if a primary record correction changes the source packet before publication.

    The correction path remains open and the public release frame should follow the strongest current records, not older drafts.

Premortem: What Could Kill This Story
  • A cited primary record is corrected or superseded before publication.
  • An official response supplies missing context that materially changes the framing.
  • A claim is repeated without its evidence-boundary language and is mistaken for a motive or illegality allegation.
Source Claims (NATO STANAG 2511 Grades)
  • STRICKLAND-FIT21-YEA-001 A1 HIGH

    Strickland YEA on FIT21 (HR-4763), roll 118-h-2024-226, May 22 2024, 279-136, 35% Dem support. Source: House Clerk roll-call records and story receipts.

  • STRICKLAND-IRS-DEFI-CRA-2025-001 A1 HIGH

    Strickland YEA on IRS DeFi CRA (HJRes-25), roll 119-h-2025-71, March 11 2025, 292-132, 37% Dem support. Source: House Clerk roll-call records and story receipts.

  • STRICKLAND-DAMA-YEA-2025-001 A1 HIGH

    Strickland YEA on CLARITY Act/DAMA (HR-3633), roll 119-h-2025-199, July 17 2025, 294-134, 37% Dem support. Source: House Clerk roll-call records and story receipts.

  • STRICKLAND-GENIUS-ACT-YEA-001 A1 HIGH

    Strickland YEA on GENIUS Act stablecoin (S-1582), roll 119-h-2025-200, July 17 2025 (same day as DAMA). Source: House Clerk roll-call records and story receipts.

  • STRICKLAND-A16Z-PREAVOTE-001 A1 HIGH

    a16z founders Andreessen + Horowitz + Dixon = $5,000 combined to Strickland 13-19 days pre-FIT21. Strickland was only House Dem with pre-FIT21 a16z contribution. Source: FEC public records, House disclosure records, and story methodology.

  • STRICKLAND-CRYPTO-CEO-CLUSTER-001 A1 HIGH

    Crypto CEO contributions: Bhatt $5K + Adams $3,300 + Armstrong $3,300 + Shihara $3,300. All documented FEC Schedule A line items. Source: FEC public records, House disclosure records, and story methodology.

  • STRICKLAND-TRIFECTA-BLOC-001 A1 HIGH

    36 House Dems voted YEA on FIT21 + IRS DeFi CRA + DAMA. Strickland is one of 36. Bloc includes Aguilar (Dem Caucus Chair), Khanna, Lieu, Gottheimer, Krishnamoorthi, Auchincloss, DelBene. Source: House Clerk roll-call records and story receipts.

  • STRICKLAND-STANDWITHCRYPTO-001 A1 HIGH

    Stand With Crypto grades Strickland 'Strongly supports crypto' based on 6 tracked votes. Industry-funded advocacy organization.

  • STRICKLAND-WA-AG-ROBINHOOD-001 A1 HIGH

    WA AG: 266 consumer complaints + $665,000 consumer relief vs Robinhood. Robinhood benefits from FIT21 framework. Source: House Clerk roll-call records and story receipts.

How This Was Researched

Primary sources first. The four crypto-industry roll calls are House Clerk records: FIT21 on May 22, 2024; IRS DeFi CRA on March 11, 2025; DAMA on July 17, 2025; GENIUS Act on July 17, 2025 (all Admiralty A1). Each tally, bill text, sponsor, and Democratic party-break percentage is queryable from the same House Clerk XML and Congress.gov bill pages. Pre-vote contributions are FEC Schedule A bulk-export line items for committee C00732826; the a16z founder cluster's pre-FIT21 timing is verifiable by date: Andreessen May 9, 2024 ($1,666); Horowitz May 3, 2024 ($1,666); Dixon May 9, 2024 ($1,668); FIT21 vote May 22, 2024 (A1). The 36-Democrat trifecta bloc roster is reconstructable from House Clerk roll-call cross-reference.

Estimated probability that pre-vote contributions causally drove the YEA votes: cannot be quantified, and the story explicitly does not claim it. Estimated probability that the contribution-then-vote sequence is observable by document date: HIGH (FEC dates and House Clerk dates are both A1). Analytic confidence in the 36-Democrat trifecta bloc count: HIGH (House Clerk primary cross-reference). Analytic confidence in the Stand With Crypto industry endorsement of Strickland: HIGH (the industry's own published grading). Analytic confidence in the constituent-harm anchor (Washington Attorney General's Robinhood enforcement record): HIGH (state AG press release primary).

Linchpin assumption: that the documented contribution-then-vote date sequence, combined with industry endorsement, is the right reference frame for the four crypto-bloc votes. Alternative hypotheses considered: (1) Strickland's crypto-industry support reflects sincere policy preference toward financial-innovation deregulation, independent of donation timing, (2) The pre-vote contribution timing is coincidence within a 30-day fundraising window common to many House members, (3) The 36-Democrat trifecta bloc represents a stable centrist financial-deregulation caucus and the donation pattern reflects bloc membership rather than vote-by-vote influence. (3) is partly addressed by including the bloc context. (1) and (2) are unfalsifiable without internal campaign records.

What this story does not claim: that contributions purchased the votes. The framing throughout is documented contributions preceded documented votes in a documented sequence. The 36-Democrat trifecta bloc context is included to clarify Strickland is part of a broader pattern, not a unique outlier. A source packet and correction path will be maintained for the Strickland office before any external promotion. Corrections to info@arafatforcongress.org.

How we check our work

Watchtower holds itself to the same standards U.S. intelligence agencies use for their own internal reports. Before any story goes public, it has to pass every check on this page. Here is exactly what each rating means and how we earn it.

How sure are we?

The scale you see at the top of every story tops out at Almost Certain (95 to 99 percent), not "100 percent certain." That is on purpose. Honest analysts do not say "certain" because real evidence has limits. When someone tells you they are 100 percent sure of anything political, that is the warning sign. Almost Certain is the firmest call a careful analyst makes.

What we call itHow confidentWhat it really means
Almost Certain95 to 99%The public record proves it. No serious alternative explanation survives.
Very Likely80 to 95%Backed up by multiple government records or filings that line up.
Likely55 to 80%The record points this way. Some honest uncertainty remains.
Roughly Even Chance45 to 55%Genuinely a toss-up. We tell you straight when we are not sure.
Unlikely20 to 45%Most of the evidence cuts the other way.
Very Unlikely5 to 20%The record strongly contradicts it.
Almost Certainly Not1 to 5%The public record contradicts it. We would not publish a story at this rating.

Same scale used by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ICD 203, Analytic Standards). Designed by Sherman Kent at Yale in 1964 after the intelligence community realized that vague words like "likely" meant different things to different readers.

How good are our sources?

Every fact in a Watchtower story is tied to a specific source, and every source is graded the way NATO intelligence agencies grade theirs. Sources get two scores. The first is how trustworthy the source itself is. The second is how solid the specific piece of information is.

Source ratingWhat it meansInfo ratingWhat it means
ACompletely trustworthy. Government filing, court document, official agency record.1Confirmed by independent sources.
BUsually trustworthy. Reputable institution, minor doubt.2Probably true based on what else we know.
CSometimes trustworthy. Use with care.3Possibly true. Cannot fully verify.
DOften unreliable.4Doubtful.
EUnreliable.5Improbable.
FCannot be judged.6Cannot be judged.

A claim graded A1 is the strongest a piece of evidence can be. Watchtower has a hard rule: every released story has to be built on at least one A1 or A2 source. Stories that lean on C-grade or weaker sources stay out of the public release set. You can see every source under the Receipts list on this page, each one tagged with its grade.

Same grading system as NATO STANAG 2511 and Allied Joint Publication AJP-2.1. Used by U.S. and allied military intelligence to evaluate every reported fact.

How confident are we in our own reasoning?

This is different from "how sure are we" above. The probability band rates the conclusion. This rates the analysis itself, the chain of reasoning that got us there. A story can be Almost Certain on the conclusion but only MEDIUM confidence in the reasoning if the path from facts to conclusion has weak links. We tell you both.

  • HIGH Multiple primary sources line up. The chain of reasoning is short and well-supported. Other explanations have been tested and ruled out.
  • MEDIUM Some sources are second-hand, or the reasoning chain has one or two links that someone could reasonably question.
  • LOW Few sources, or the reasoning depends on assumptions we have not been able to verify yet. We rarely publish at LOW.

What else could explain this?

For every story, we write out at least three other ways the evidence could be explained, then say honestly why we do not believe each of them as much as the one we went with. This is meant to keep us honest. The point is to pick the explanation that has the fewest holes, not the one that came to mind first or the one that feels right.

  • leading Our working explanation. It has the fewest unexplained gaps once we run the evidence against every alternative.
  • less supported A plausible alternative. The evidence does not rule it out, but the leading explanation fits better.
  • rejected Inconsistent with what the records show. We can rule this one out.

This technique is called Analysis of Competing Hypotheses. It was developed by a former CIA analyst, Richards Heuer, and is taught in the CIA's own Tradecraft Primer (2009 edition).

What would prove us wrong?

Before we publish a story, we write down exactly what evidence would force us to correct or take it back, and we publish that list right with the story. Look for the Premortem section above. If any of those scenarios later turns out to be true, the Corrections and Updates log on this page records what changed and when. We are betting on the public record being right; if the record changes, so do we.

This technique is called a premortem. It comes from Gary Klein, a decision-science researcher who wrote it up in the Harvard Business Review in 2007. Imagine the project failed; what would have killed it? Then list those things up front.

What is this story betting on?

Every Watchtower story rests on one assumption that, if it turned out to be wrong, would knock the whole thing down. We name it explicitly in the Linchpin Assumption section above, and we tell you what evidence would prove that assumption wrong. You do not have to take our word for any of it. The linchpin is there so you can stress-test the story yourself.

What if we get something wrong?

Spotted an error? Use the corrections form at the bottom of this page. Every correction we accept gets logged publicly with the date, what changed, and why. We do not silently edit. We treat our own track record as evidence too.

Corrections & Updates

No corrections or updates issued since publish. Spotted an error? Use the corrections form below.

Found an error? Have a tip?

Every Watchtower claim is tied to a primary source. If a claim, number, quote, or source link is wrong, tell us with the primary record that contradicts it. Corrections are published with the story; sources are protected.

Send a correction or tip
Embed this finding on another site

Drop this snippet into any HTML page to embed the trust strip + headline as an iframe widget:

Or cite this story directly via citation.txt (BibTeX / RIS / APA 7 / MLA 9 / plain).

Related Topics

Topic Hub
Campaign Finance and FEC Records
Topic Hub
Endorsement Accountability

Related Stories

Watchtower Accountability File
Endorsements Should Survive Audit.
Watchtower Endorsement Accountability
AFL-CIO Said No. Strickland Voted Yes.
Watchtower Investigation
Six Pension Funds Own a Washington Utility. Rates Rose About 30%.
Watchtower Investigation
April 17, 2024: AIPAC PAC's First Three Contributions Totaled $3,750. The Same Day, Three Iran, Israel, and Houthi Floor Votes Passed.