#MEMEAct

This is a serious and relevant question that touches on the intersection of politics, finance, and ethics.

On one hand, the ban has grounds:

1. Conflict of interest: When politicians or their families promote crypto assets, they may use their position to create artificial demand, influencing the market and enriching themselves at the expense of voter trust.

2. Manipulation of public opinion: Meme coins generally lack fundamental value. If a politician uses their platform to promote them, it can mislead inexperienced investors.

3. Risks to financial stability: The emergence of politically colored tokens can cause market turbulence and increase polarization among citizens.

On the other hand, counterarguments are possible:

1. Freedom to participate in innovation: Politicians, like everyone else, have the right to engage in new economic sectors, as long as they do so transparently and in accordance with the law.

2. A matter of regulation, not prohibition: Instead of a complete ban, it may be reasonable to introduce strict reporting, disclosure of interests, and a ban on promoting tokens in which there is a personal interest.