Pass the Clarity Act
The author argues against proposed changes to the Clarity Act, suggesting that last-minute demands from banks are intended to delay or kill the legislation. The piece explains how specific legal terminology changes could undermine the bill's effectiveness regarding stablecoin regulation.
Why it matters
The debate reflects the ongoing tension between traditional banking interests and the emerging regulatory framework for cryptocurrency.
On September 15, less than four weeks from now, the Senate will vote on whether to debate this bill. That vote needs the OK from 60 senators. Afterward, the Senate has less than three working weeks before the fall spending fight dominates the Senate calendar and the legislative window effectively closes ahead of the midterms. That’s a very tight window to get this bill over the line. With that in mind, the big banks are introducing a demand to reopen a provision that had been negotiated over many months, with their representatives at the table the entire time. Reopening it now would not improve the bill. It would restart a negotiation nobody has time to finish. We feel that this “discussion” is simply a delay to kill the legislation.
Summer Mersinger is CEO of the Blockchain Association and a former commissioner of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in