I think that AML can be quite a limiting factor in the legitimization of cryptocurrency. Due to how novel the idea of crypto is to regulators, I hope that experts will be invited to answer questions because otherwise we could hear many ignorant and prejudiced opinions.
It really doesn't matter whether experts testify or not. If you want a really good example of why, go on Youtube and watch the Senate hearings regarding the PMRC. The level of ignorance and privilege present in the American government was of epic proportions back then. It hasn't gotten better. No amount of expertise can break through deliberate ignorance.
And it is deliberate. Since 1913, The ENTIRE underpinning of the power structure has been the (suddenly fiat) US Dollar. Anything that threatens that is frightening, and they haven't figured out a way to control it. Within the limits they have to live with, there really isn't a way to control it. No entity, ever, is more Luddite than a "conservative" government, because Technology represents change, and possibly progress. Those are two things that tend to weaken power structures, especially power structures that are a century or more past their theoretical usefulness. I personally dispute that they were ever useful, but that's a discussion for another time.
We have reached the point where the various ruling instrumentalities have no choice but to recognize BTC and other digital currencies. Lack of choice does not compel good legislation, if there is such a thing.
