Crypto donors are intensifying political involvement in California as Grow California, a PAC spearheaded by Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen and venture capitalist Tim Draper, mobilizes tens of millions to influence the 2026 state elections. The group seeks to counterbalance the influence of labor unions by backing a small slate of moderate, business-friendly candidates in the California Legislature, with a plan that includes about $40 million in commitments across independent committees and affiliated nonprofits. The push arrives amid debate over a proposed wealth tax backed by a healthcare union that would tax the assets of the state’s wealthiest residents if approved, a catalyst that organizers say underscores the need for counterweights.
Key takeaways
- Grow California was seeded by Chris Larsen and Tim Draper; both contributed $5 million to launch the group last September, with roughly $40 million in commitments currently attributed to independent-expenditure committees and affiliated nonprofits.
- The effort targets a limited number of state Senate and Assembly races, aiming to influence outcomes without fielding a full slate or contesting the gubernatorial race in 2026.
- The backdrop is a proposed wealth tax backed by a healthcare union; organizers say the proposal has sharpened the need for a counterweight, even if the seed money predates the initiative.
- California Democrats hold a large supermajority in both chambers, and Grow California seeks to tilt policy debates by funding moderate, pro-business candidates in key districts.
- Beyond Grow California, the crypto-funding ecosystem is expanding its footprint in U.S. politics, with large-donor PACs like Fairshake signaling sustained, multi-year campaigns that translate crypto wealth into political influence.
Tickers mentioned: $BTC
Market context: The rise of crypto-driven political giving comes as regulators weigh digital-asset guidelines and as industry-backed groups seek to shape policy outcomes at both state and federal levels. The California dynamic mirrors a broader trend of increased crypto philanthropy and advocacy funding across the United States, particularly in jurisdictions where policy choices could affect how digital assets are treated under tax, securities, and fiduciary regimes.
Why it matters
Grow California represents a notable shift in how crypto wealth intersects with state politics. By coordinating seed money into a targeted slate of candidates, Larsen and Draper are testing whether concentrated, issue-focused spending can alter the calculus in legislative battles where unions have long had a strong foothold. If successful, the approach could embolden other high-net-worth crypto figures to pursue similar strategies in states with meaningful regulatory control over financial technology and asset markets. Observers will watch how this funding translates into messaging, endorsements, and ultimately, ballot-box decisions in districts that have historically leaned toward union-led policy frames.
From a policy perspective, the wealth tax debate adds another layer of complexity. While Grow California notes its funding occurred prior to, or in the shadow of, the proposal, the tax concept — taxing the assets of the wealthiest residents — has already become a rallying point for both proponents and opponents of crypto-friendly reforms. In this environment, a chorus of industry voices argues that a moderated, business-friendly legislative contingent could help advance practical, innovation-oriented policies without triggering a drag on California’s entrepreneurial ecosystem.
As the crypto-ecosystem looks beyond campaign contributions toward lasting influence, the case of Fairshake underscores the evolving scale of political engagement. Reports show Fairshake holding about $193 million in cash, buoyed by investments from Ripple Labs, Andreessen Horowitz and Coinbase, with a stated intention to sustain aggressive outreach well beyond the 2024 federal election cycle. That level of liquidity signals a broader strategy: turn crypto wealth into messaging, align assets with policy priorities, and maintain pressure on regulators and lawmakers through targeted media buys and constituency-building efforts. The dynamic illustrates how industry players are moving from one-off donations to sustained political interaction, a pattern that could reshape policy debates over time as digital assets intersect with taxation, consumer protection, and market access considerations.
Context for the California case is provided by contemporaneous analyses of the federal landscape. Industry observers have highlighted a growing momentum around crypto-friendly policy positions in 2026, including questions about how Congress will address digital-asset regulation and innovation. See discussions around pro-crypto momentum in federal elections for broader context and potential implications for state-level campaigns that align with or push back against national policy directions.
What to watch next
- Updated campaign-finance disclosures from Grow California detailing contributions, expenditures, and any additional commitments from Larsen and Draper.
- Responses from California labor unions and Democratic incumbents in districts targeted by Grow California’s strategy.
- Identification of the specific legislative races that receive support and any measurable impact on floor votes or committee appointments.
- Regulatory developments or legislative proposals that relate to crypto policy and taxation in California, including how the wealth tax debate evolves.
- Follow-up reporting on the broader crypto PAC ecosystem, including any shifts in fundraising strategies or new major donors in the state arena.
Sources & verification
- Campaign finance filings showing Larsen and Draper each contributed $5 million to Grow California to launch the group in the prior September period.
- The New York Times report detailingGrow California and its backers, including quotes from Larsen about counterweights to unions.
- Grow California’s stated fundraising commitments totaling roughly $40 million across independent-expenditure committees and affiliated nonprofits.
- Larsen’s public remarks about the California political system and the reference to lessons learned from crypto-backed super PACs in federal elections.
- Fairshake disclosures revealing approximately $193 million in cash and its plan to spend more than $130 million in media buys during the 2024 federal elections, with contributions from Ripple Labs, Andreessen Horowitz and Coinbase.
Crypto donors reshape California politics ahead of 2026 midterms
Two prominent crypto supporters are backing Grow California, a political action committee designed to push moderate, business-friendly candidates into California’s Legislature. The initiative is led by Chris Larsen, the Ripple co-founder who has long been a high-profile donor in Democratic circles, and Tim Draper, a venture capitalist whose public advocacy for Bitcoin has become a fixture in crypto politics. Each founder contributed $5 million to launch the group last September, and Grow California now asserts it has secured roughly $40 million in commitments across independent-expenditure committees and affiliated nonprofit entities. Larsen has signaled that he could contribute as much as $30 million across multiple election cycles, underscoring how deep-pocket donors see strategic value in shaping state policy in a pro-innovation direction.
California’s political tapestry is shaped by a Democratic supermajority in both legislative chambers, with unions often serving as potent gatekeepers in closely contested races. In response, Grow California says its resources will be deployed selectively, concentrating on a limited set of state Senate and Assembly contests that the founders believe could tilt policy toward more business-friendly outcomes. The group has stated it will refrain from engaging in the 2026 gubernatorial race and from financing statewide ballot campaigns, opting instead to influence legislative dynamics through targeted campaigns and messaging in specific districts.
In interviews circulating through major outlets, Larsen framed the effort as a necessary counterweight to what he described as a political landscape dominated by a cluster of powerful interests. He has suggested that while government unions perform important work, a counterforce is essential to ensure California’s policy environment remains conducive to growth and innovation. The context for the push includes a wealth tax proposal backed by a healthcare union that would tax the assets of the state’s wealthiest residents if approved by voters. Although Grow California says its seed money predated the proposal, the tax has nonetheless become a rallying point that mobilizes both supporters and opponents around the future of wealth taxes and asset treatment in the state’s policy framework. For wider context on this debate, readers can explore reporting that discusses the broader implications of crypto wealth in U.S. politics.
Beyond the Grow California initiative, the broader ecosystem of crypto-funded political action committees is intensifying its activity ahead of the 2026 midterms. Fairshake disclosed it is holding about $193 million in cash, a reserve amplified by substantial contributions from players like Ripple Labs, Andreessen Horowitz and Coinbase. The group indicated plans to remain active after spending more than $130 million on media buys in the 2024 federal elections, signaling a strategy of sustained political engagement rather than episodic fundraising. This pattern — large, long-horizon investments aimed at shaping regulatory and policy outcomes — is increasingly shaping discussions around crypto regulation, taxation, and investor protections as lawmakers chart a path for digital assets in the broader economy.
As coverage of the sector’s political influence expands, observers are watching how these high-profile fundraising efforts translate into actual legislative outcomes. The current trajectory suggests a more pronounced role for crypto wealth in state politics, a trend that aligns with discussions in national circles about how Congress may position itself on digital-asset policy in the coming years. The evolving landscape raises important questions about transparency, accountability, and the possible impact on California’s regulatory climate for technology, finance, and innovation.
