HOUSTON — Cryptocurrency-backed political action committees are spending heavily in Texas’ closely watched congressional contests, with the runoff election in Congressional District 18 emerging as one of the biggest battlegrounds for the industry’s growing political influence.
According to recent Federal Election Commission filings cited in multiple reports, crypto-aligned PACs have spent more than $2.5 million so far this year on Texas congressional races, a sharp increase from roughly $1 million in 2024. The spending surge underscores how digital asset companies and their political allies are becoming more aggressive in trying to shape the outcome of competitive elections across the state.
Much of the attention has centered on the race involving Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee, who has become the recipient of a large share of the industry’s money. Reports indicate that Protect Progress, the progressive arm associated with Fairshake — one of the best-known crypto super PAC networks — has spent more than $1.5 million supporting Menefee’s campaign in an effort to defeat U.S. Rep. Al Green.
That level of spending means Menefee has received nearly two-thirds of all cryptocurrency-related spending in Texas races this cycle, according to the filings. In practical terms, the money has helped finance a political push that is increasingly being framed not just as a local runoff, but as part of a broader national fight over the future of cryptocurrency regulation and federal election power.
Crypto money expands in Texas politics
Texas has become a major target for cryptocurrency political spending because of its size, competitive districts and growing role in national Republican and Democratic politics. Industry-backed PACs have already spent at least $28 million nationally on behalf of candidates across the country at this point in the midterm cycle, signaling that the sector is no longer experimenting with political influence — it is investing in it at scale.
In Texas, two PACs have been particularly active: Defend American Jobs and Protect Progress. Together, they have accounted for the bulk of the more than $2.5 million spent in the state this year, based on the latest FEC disclosures.
Defend American Jobs has typically aligned itself with pro-industry, market-friendly candidates, while Protect Progress has positioned itself as a Democratic-leaning counterpart that also backs candidates seen as favorable to crypto innovation and regulation. The result is a somewhat unusual political ecosystem in which competing factions within the broader digital asset world are trying to influence elections from different ideological angles.
Even though the industry’s spending is often framed as issue advocacy, it can have a direct impact on candidate fortunes by funding television ads, digital campaigns, voter outreach and opposition research. In tight races, that money can be decisive.
Menefee becomes a major beneficiary
Menefee’s rise in the race has drawn especially intense attention because of the scale of outside support behind him. His campaign’s alliance with crypto-aligned interests has become a talking point among political observers, particularly after Fox 26’s “What’s Your Point?” panel discussed the role of “crypto kings” in the runoff.
The spending has also complicated the race’s political narrative. For Menefee, the backing represents a major boost in visibility and resources as he seeks to position himself as a candidate for change. For critics, however, the outside money raises questions about how much influence a fast-growing industry should have in a local Texas election.
Al Green, a longtime incumbent known for his progressive credentials, has faced an unusually expensive challenge in a contest that is being watched far beyond Houston. The infusion of crypto money has given the runoff a national cast, with digital asset advocates and skeptics alike viewing the outcome as a signal of where the industry’s political clout stands heading into the 2026 midterms.
Menefee has also highlighted innovation and emerging technology in his public messaging, including efforts to modernize government services and go after scammers targeting underserved communities. Those themes may have helped make him an appealing figure for crypto interests eager to align themselves with reform-minded candidates.
A broader fight over crypto’s political future
The Texas spending spree reflects a larger shift in how cryptocurrency companies and their allies are engaging with Washington and state politics. After years of regulatory uncertainty, the industry has increasingly viewed elections as central to its future, pouring money into races where control of Congress or influence over policy could shape everything from digital asset rules to enforcement priorities.
That strategy is visible not only in Texas, but in battleground states across the country. According to national filings, crypto-aligned super PACs have already spent tens of millions of dollars this cycle. The goal, political analysts say, is not simply to help individual candidates, but to build a friendlier policy environment for the industry as lawmakers continue debating how digital assets should be regulated.
For Texas voters, the money may be less about cryptocurrency itself than about what it represents: the increasing role of large outside interests in local and congressional elections. As spending rises, campaigns are becoming more expensive, more nationalized and more dependent on political networks with the resources to flood the airwaves.
The runoff in District 18 is expected to remain a focal point as election day approaches. With crypto PACs already pouring in millions, the race has become a test case for whether a new class of donors can reshape older political contests — and whether voters will embrace or reject that influence.
Whatever the result, the Texas elections are now part of a larger story: cryptocurrency is no longer just a financial and technological issue. It is a political force, and in 2026, it is spending like one.