Haven't they already passed regulations on it? Making the exchanges have "bitlicense"?, if so what are the implications on the currently passed laws.
I do admire their actions though. It's true cryptos are poorly understood. They have pros and cons. It's better to keep observing it than to dismiss it in a snap.
I believe the BitLicense is only a local law, not a federal one. The processes required for bills to be passed in the federal government through the legislative branch and then to be signed by the president is a very rigorous one. This is probably one of the reasons why no significant Bitcoin or crypto regulations have been put into effect by them along with the heated political climate that has surged because of all the debates around President Trump and the partisan fights. Passing local state laws such as was the case with BitLicense in New York is easier as it is faster to find support for ideals since ideologies tend to be more biased within the local scope. I do believe, however, that any talk about crypto or Bitcoin in any legislative agenda would help promote the legitimacy of these as real currencies that can be safely use to transact with others.
The federal government is occupied with so many things which weren't a factor before Trump, that they simply don't have the time to think about crypto regulations in my opinion. Which is a shame, I'm sure if Obama was still around, crypto regulations would have been implemented way faster, since the government wouldn't be occupied with stupid things like travel bans and wall building and all that; and could concentrate on real issues.
