The core issue is this: a politician’s name or public persona alone can create an illusion of trust, making investors believe the asset is credible or destined for success. But in many cases, these cryptos lack solid fundamentals, clear use cases, or sustainable value. They're speculative by nature, and their price may be driven purely by hype rather than by real-world application.
There are also less obvious, yet equally dangerous, reasons to consider a regulation:
Market manipulation: politicians might sway prices through public endorsements while holding stakes in these assets.
Conflicts of interest: political decisions could be influenced by personal financial gain.
Exploitation of public trust: supporters might feel they’re backing a cause when, in reality, they’re fueling speculative ventures.
U.S. Senator Chris Murphy has introduced the Modern Emoluments and Malfeasance Enforcement (MEME) Act, a bill that would prohibit the President, Vice President, members of Congress, senior officials, and their families from creating, promoting, or profiting from any financial asset including cryptocurrencies and memecoins.
This initiative comes in response to the growing scrutiny surrounding politically-themed memecoins, such as $TRUMP . These tokens often derive their appeal not from technical innovation or economic value, but simply from the public figure they reference.
The MEMEAct aims to draw a strict boundary between political power and financial incentives in the crypto world — a space already known for its volatility and lack of regulation. By doing so, it seeks to protect the public from financial manipulation and preserve the integrity of democratic institutions.
Do you think political figures and their families should be barred from launching or promoting crypto assets?
