The path to federal stablecoin regulation just got real. In a surprise move on Thursday, two Democratic senators crossed party lines in the Senate Banking Committee to advance the Clarity Act.
Alex Thorn of Galaxy notes the two ‘yes’ votes from Senators Ruben Gallego and Angela Alsobrooks shifted the political math, pushing his estimated odds of the bill becoming law this year from 50% to 75%. With only about nine weeks of Congressional session left before the August recess, the bill now has tangible momentum.
“The surprise yes votes came from Senators Ruben Gallego and Angela Alsobrooks. Thorn increased his odds of the Clarity Act passing this year from 50% to 75%.”
- Alex Thorn, Bankless
The bill’s primary value is locking in policy for decades, providing the entrepreneurial security needed for full institutional adoption. Thorn views it as foundational, analogous to the securities laws of the 1930s. Failure would shelve the effort until a new Congress, delaying certainty but not stopping industry growth, which he believes could continue for roughly nine more quarters without it.
One major landmine remains: an ethics provision. Democrats want to prohibit elected officials and their families from profiting from cryptocurrencies. The White House opposes rules that single out the president or vice president, requiring broader language. Thorn identifies this as the single biggest threat to the bill's survival, as Republicans are unlikely to sign what feels like a targeted attack.
Meanwhile, banks won a key concession to protect their deposit base. The compromise prohibits paying yield on ‘idle balances’ but allows rewards tied to ‘user activity’ - a semantic workaround that punts the technical definition to future rulemaking. Thorn argues banks are playing a cynical delay game to protect their moats while building competing products.
The push for regulatory clarity coincides with pressure from another direction. President Trump recently signed an executive order directing the Fed to review granting crypto firms access to central bank master accounts, a move analyst David Bennett argues shifts the burden of proof onto the Fed to justify any future denials.
