Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
BTC 
ETH Backers of the CLARITY bill face 60-vote procedural obstacles, and final passage still requires further Senate action.
White House cryptocurrency adviser Patrick Witt expressed confidence in the CLARITY bill ahead of a planned Senate procedural vote on Tuesday. Speaking at the Solana Policy Institute summit in Washington on Monday, he said getting 60 votes was a political challenge.
Witt said negotiators had addressed concerns raised throughout the negotiation process. However, banks, Democrats and developer advocates are still debating the terms of the latest draft.
Moral compromise on CLARITY bill meets Democratic resistance
Patrick Vitter, executive director of the White House Digital Assets Advisory Board, called the plan a "final offer." He said President Donald Trump approved the revised moral language clause.
Cryptocurrency companies have been offering rewards on stablecoins for years. There is no need to speculate: if the claim of loss of deposits is true, it has already occurred. Instead, data shows that bank deposits are rising rather than falling.
Still, the compromise contained in section 404 of the CLARITY Act gives state attorneys general a role in enforcing conflict of interest restrictions involving federal officials. However, Democrats, including Elizabeth Warren, question whether those powers are enough to cover the president and other public officials.
Witt rejected suggestions that the state attorney general was unable to prosecute officials. Senator Chris Van Hollen also opposed the legislation, arguing that the bill's consumer protection and ethics provisions need further changes.
Tuesday's vote involved a procedural vote on a motion to end debate, rather than a final pass. The Republican Party has 53 seats. Even if it obtains the support of all the party, it still requires 7 Democrats or independents to vote in favor to reach the 60-vote requirement.
Banks and developers challenge the latest compromise
The CLARITY Act would authorize the Treasury Department to limit the reward mechanism of stablecoins when community banks experience large deposit withdrawals. Banking associations believe it is too late to intervene after deposits are lost.
They want to strengthen clear limits on interest-like payments linked to payment stablecoins. Despite the proposed circuit breaker mechanism, their opposition continues.
Developer advocates also oppose removing explicit criminal legal protections under section 1960. The Coin Center pointed out that the revised BRCA improves regulatory safeguards but leaves a core issue of criminal liability unresolved.
Witt defended the developer terms and attributed the changes to Senate negotiations involving Catherine Cortez Masto. He pointed out that if the CLARITY Act stagnates, the existing rulemaking powers of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) can still be effective.
"These institutions already have huge rulemaking power," Witt said.
