U.S. politicians’ view of the cryptocurrency industry is changing, and the sector’s resilience in surviving years of regulatory pressure is instead persuading lawmakers, a claim has emerged.

On Aug. 6 local time, blockchain media outlet U.Today reported that Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) co-founder Marc Andreessen recently appeared on the "a16z Crypto Show" and assessed that the Biden administration’s tough regulatory stance paradoxically proved the crypto industry’s durability.

Andreessen argued that the White House at the time effectively showed an attitude of trying to eliminate the crypto industry. He said the approach focused on post-hoc punishment and indictments rather than building a regulatory framework. "An administration at the White House decided to kill this industry," he said. "It rejected clear regulation and instead went after indictments as if declaring war."

He analyzed that the fact the industry and technology did not collapse under such pressure is changing perceptions in Washington politics. Some lawmakers are taking survival during the period when authorities sought to bring the industry down as a sign of the industry’s necessity and competitiveness.

Andreessen said some lawmakers he met told him, "If it didn’t die even when we were trying to kill it, it could be a decent industry," and now say they will support crypto. Still, he stressed that a shift in political mood alone is not enough and said it is urgent to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework such as the CLARITY bill currently under discussion in the U.S. Senate.

Andreessen said the United States needs a stable and permanent regulatory structure for crypto, like stock and bond markets. With a clear legal framework, companies can draw up long-term business plans and the market can also grow steadily, he said.

He pointed out that the longer the regulatory vacuum lasts, the more it creates an environment that favors offshore operators or illegal actors. In contrast, U.S. companies that try to comply could lose competitiveness amid uncertainty, he said.

As a representative example, he mentioned the collapse of FTX. Without a clear regulatory framework, it is difficult to properly protect user funds, and the market could end up being led not by responsible operators but by offshore operators in regulatory blind spots, he said.

"People’s money must not be stolen," Andreessen said. "The winner in the market must not be a flashy operator running things from a yacht somewhere off the coast." He added that what the industry wants is not government favors or subsidies but a standing system that allows responsible business operations.

He also pushed back against criticism raised by some politicians that "crypto is a channel for illicit financing." Contrary to claims by U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren and others who have called for tighter crypto regulation, he said national security officials he has contacted are focusing on the traceability of blockchain.

Andreessen said people in national security instead assessed positively that the more criminal organizations or terrorist groups use blockchain-based networks, the more transaction records are left and the more tracking becomes possible.

The remarks once again highlight that a core task for the U.S. crypto industry is not simply regulatory easing but building a clear and sustainable institutional foundation. Along with the assessment that the industry’s resilience drove a shift in political perceptions, attention is focused on what impact legislative discussions in the U.S. Congress, including the CLARITY bill, will have on the industry’s competitive environment and investor protection system.