Recently, there has been an interesting phenomenon — in the prediction markets, the probability of the Democratic Party winning the House in 2026 has soared to 75%. Against this backdrop, Democratic House Financial Services Committee member Maxine Waters has begun to repeatedly criticize SEC Chairman Paul Atkins' crypto policies.

Where is the problem? Waters questions why, since Atkins took office, the SEC has terminated major enforcement cases against certain leading exchanges, a large platform, and well-known individuals. Are these decision-making processes transparent? Could they affect market risk management? She also pointed out that some dismissed cases were announced before the committee's formal vote, and Atkins' office seems to have put a lot of effort into negotiating settlements, which sounds a bit procedural irregular.

The underlying logic is quite clear. After the Trump administration took office, the SEC leadership underwent a major shake-up. Once the new chairman was in place, the SEC basically withdrew all unresolved crypto lawsuits and exited multiple court disputes. Although the SEC is nominally an independent federal regulatory agency not directly controlled by the White House, Atkins' policy stance aligns closely with Trump’s goal of revitalizing the US crypto industry — which gives Democratic lawmakers a reason to question.

Waters' core accusation is: Atkins has turned the SEC into a tool of the government, violating the principle of regulatory independence. She also criticized that the SEC adjusts crypto policies through statements of work rather than formal rules, bypassing the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act and not sufficiently consulting the public. The interests behind these decisions are kept completely confidential.

In plain terms, this is not just routine partisan bickering over crypto issues, but a prelude to a new round of fierce competition over the regulation of the US crypto industry. The current lax regulatory environment could be overturned at any time.