.@rweingarten 1. False claim: The bill “exposes working families… to cryptocurrency” **Reality**: The RFIA does not force any retirement plan (401(k), pension, etc.) to offer or invest in crypto. It simply gives plans the option to offer crypto-related investments if they choose to and if they meet certain fiduciary and disclosure standards. Participation remains 100% voluntary for workers. No one is “exposed” unless they actively select the option. ### 2. False claim: The bill “strips the few safeguards that exist for crypto” Reality: This is backwards. The RFIA actually adds substantial new federal safeguards: - It gives the CFTC clear authority over spot crypto markets (closing the current regulatory gap). - It requires stablecoin issuers to hold 1:1 high-quality reserves, be audited, and face monthly disclosure requirements. - It imposes registration, anti-money-laundering, and consumer-protection rules on crypto exchanges and custodians. Far from stripping safeguards, the bill is widely described (even by critics) as the first serious attempt to create a federal regulatory framework for crypto. ### 3. False claim: The bill would allow non-crypto companies to “put their stock on the blockchain and evade the entire securities regulatory framework” Reality: This is a major distortion. The RFIA creates a narrow pathway for certain digital assets that are decentralized and meet specific tests to be treated as commodities rather than securities. Traditional company stock (equity in Apple, Tesla, etc.) would not qualify. Tokenizing regular corporate stock would still fall squarely under existing SEC securities laws. The letter conflates two completely different things. ### 4. False claim: 401(k) plans “will end up having unsafe assets” and “traditional securities will have disastrous loopholes” Reality: The bill explicitly says that any crypto offering in a retirement plan must still satisfy ERISA fiduciary standards (i.e., the plan sponsor has to believe it is in participants’ best interests). It does not override or weaken ERISA protections. The “loophole and erosion of traditional securities law” claim refers to the decentralization test mentioned above, which again does **not** apply to normal stocks or bonds. ### 5. False claim: The bill is “irresponsible as it is reckless” and could “lay the groundwork for the next financial crisis” Reality: This is fearmongering rhetoric, not a factual critique. The bill’s stablecoin reserve requirements and exchange registration rules are designed to reduce systemic risk compared to the current Wild West environment (see Terra/Luna, FTX, Celsius, etc.). Whether you like the bill or not, the idea that adding federal oversight = “groundwork for the next crisis” is the opposite of what a sane rational person would say.