CLARITY Act faces Senate vote push as BRCA ethics fight nears recess
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent urged Senate leaders to hold an immediate vote on the CLARITY Act before the August recess, warning Democrats may be delaying due to opposition concerns. The House already passed the CLARITY Act in July 2025 (294–134), but Senate progress depends on resolving two central sticking points: (1) ethics enforcement tied to lawmakers’ crypto interests, including whether the Department of Justice should have sole authority; and (2) the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA), which clarifies when non-custodial blockchain software developers must register as money transmitters.
Bessent said Majority Leader John Thune would test lawmakers’ positions in the coming days and framed the debate as a choice between U.S. leadership in digital-asset regulation and other countries moving ahead. Republicans hold 53 Senate seats and likely need at least seven Democrats to reach the 60-vote threshold.
On the enforcement debate, Bessent argued BRCA does not weaken anti–money laundering powers. Law enforcement backing has improved after revisions: the National Fraternal Order of Police reversed its earlier opposition, and the Major Cities Chiefs Association also supported the revised bill.
Market pricing remains cautious. Prediction markets placed the CLARITY Act’s 2026 passage probability around 26–30% as the recess approaches, down from 82% earlier in February. Traders are not treating Bessent’s “vote NOW” push as a sign of guaranteed approval. The next decisive steps are whether the White House accepts the negotiated ethics package and whether Thune schedules a procedural vote before recess.
Neutral
This is a high-importance procedural catalyst for U.S. crypto regulation, but the article does not show that passage is imminent.
- Neutral-to-cautious setup: Bessent’s push for an immediate CLARITY Act vote increases near-term political attention, yet the core blockers (ethics enforcement scope and the BRCA registration/anti-crime balance) are still unresolved. That usually means headline risk without immediate legislative confirmation.
- Market behavior signals: Prediction-market odds around 26–30% (down from 82% earlier) suggest traders still price meaningful uncertainty. Similar phases—when bills move to end-of-session scheduling but remain tied to disputed enforcement or governance language—often produce volatility in headlines, not sustained trend moves.
- What traders should watch: (1) whether the White House accepts the negotiated ethics package; (2) whether Thune schedules a procedural vote before recess; (3) how many Democrats commit to reaching the 60-vote threshold. If these milestones improve, the market could reprice toward bullish expectations. If not, the bill’s failure to advance in 2026 would likely weigh on sentiment.
Given the unresolved disputes and the still-subdued odds, the likely impact is mostly information-driven and headline-driven rather than a clear bullish or bearish fundamental shift—hence neutral.