David Bailey, who served as a cryptocurrency advisor to the Trump administration and now leads a Bitcoin treasury firm, asserts that U.S. policy support for the asset remains inadequate despite political rhetoric.
Speaking at the Bitcoin Investor Week Conference in New York—a session later published on YouTube—Bailey argued that high-level endorsement is insufficient without concrete, funded action. “At the end of the day, liking Bitcoin is not enough,” he stated. “The Trump administration was a very important first step, but you know there is so much further for us to go and not just in talk but in actual delivery.”
The Stalled Strategic Bitcoin Reserve
President Trump’s campaign prominently featured pledges to support Bitcoin and the broader crypto industry. A key promise was fulfilled in March 2025 with an executive order establishing a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. However, over a year later, the initiative has not progressed beyond holding seized criminal assets.
“We’re sitting here a year later, the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve was signed into an executive order,” Bailey remarked. “Last time I checked, we don’t even know how much Bitcoin we have exactly.”
Data from blockchain analytics firm Arkham Research indicates the U.S. government currently holds approximately 378,372 BTC, valued at roughly $22.48 billion at the time of writing. This figure represents only forfeited assets, not any new, purposefully acquired reserves.
In May 2025, White House AI and Crypto Czar David Sacks clarified the administration’s stance, noting that any additional accumulation would require a “budget-neutral” funding mechanism—meaning purchases could not be financed by new taxes or by increasing the national debt. This condition has introduced significant fiscal and political complexity.
Industry opinion has since fractured. While some, like Galaxy Digital’s Head of Firmwide Research Alex Thorn, maintained in September 2025 that there remained a “strong chance” of a funded acquisition before year-end, others grew skeptical of the timeline.
Bailey emphasized that personal or political affinity for Bitcoin does not equate to the exertion of necessary political capital. “Just because you like Bitcoin doesn’t mean that you’ve invested the political capital necessary for things to happen,” he said. “Unless you’re willing to bear the political capital necessary to mobilize the different gears necessary to move the ball forward, then at the end of the day, you can like Bitcoin, you cannot like Bitcoin, you’re going to get the same outcome achieved.”
Bitcoin’s Path Forward Without Government Mandates
Despite his critique of federal inaction, Bailey expressed profound long-term confidence in Bitcoin’s inevitable success, independent of government embrace. “It’s not like we need the government to cater for us for Bitcoin to be successful,” he contended.
He forecasted a future shift in governmental posture, stating, “Whether it’s four years from now, or 10 years from now, or 20 years from now, we will get to the point where we actually have a government that is conducive to the rules we need for Bitcoin to be successful.”
For progress within the current administration, Bailey pointed to a grassroots strategy: expanding ownership. “If we really want the progress to continue, we need more people to own Bitcoin every year,” he urged. “We need more voters to own Bitcoin every year. And then it is just inevitable.”
At the time of the conference, Bitcoin was trading near $68,220, according to CoinMarketCap—approximately 45% below its all-time high of over $126,000 reached in October 2024.
Looking Beyond the Reserve: Regulatory Clarity
Bailey’s comments coincide with ongoing industry focus on legislative solutions. Alongside the stalled reserve, advocates are closely watching the proposed CLARITY Act in the U.S. Congress, which seeks to establish a clear regulatory framework for digital assets. On the same day as Bailey’s remarks, President Trump posted on Truth Social, stating, “the U.S. needs to get Market Structure done, ASAP,” signaling continued executive interest in the issue.
<
