US Treasury Secretary Urges Congress To Pass Crypto Market Structure Bill This Spring

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-02-14Actualizado a 2026-02-14

Resumen

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has urged Congress to pass the stalled crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act, this spring to provide market reassurance amid recent volatility. He noted that some industry opposition has contributed to instability and emphasized the importance of bipartisan cooperation to advance the legislation. Bessent warned that the opportunity could diminish if Democrats gain control of the House in November. Patrick Witt of the Crypto Council also discussed the bill's progress, highlighting that the Senate Agriculture Committee portion has passed, but the Banking Committee's section remains pending. He called for compromise to address issues like stablecoin regulations without derailing the broader bill, which includes key measures on regulatory clarity and developer protections.

The US Secretary of the Treasury has called for the passage of the long-awaited crypto market structure bill this spring to provide reassurance to the industry amid recent market volatility.

Bessent Calls For Crypto Market Structure Bill

On Friday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent urged the US lawmakers to pass the stalled crypto market structure bill soon, highlighting the importance of getting the legislation on President Donald Trump’s desk before the end of the spring legislative window.

In a CNBC interview, Bessent affirmed that part of the recent market volatility was “self-induced” due to the reaction of some industry participants to the bill. He affirmed that some digital assets firms have been blocking it, which hasn’t been “good for the overall crypto community.”

Notably, the long-awaited CLARITY Act has been stalled for nearly a month after the Senate Banking Committee published its bill draft. The legislation was heavily criticized by crypto industry leaders, who slammed multiple of its policies, including key restrictions for stablecoin issuers.

The Treasury Secretary considers that passing the bill would “give great comfort” to the market at a time of significant volatility. Moreover, he pointed out that there’s a bipartisan working group trying to advance the legislation, with democrats “that want to work with republicans on getting a market structure bill.”

However, Bessent noted that the chances of getting a deal done could fall apart if Democrats take control of the House of Representatives in November, highlighting the Biden administration’s crackdown on the industry.

“There’s a lot of innovation that goes on adjacent to crypto, the blockchain, and DeFi. So, I think it’s important to get this clarity bill done as soon as possible and on the president’s desk this spring,” he concluded.

‘More Work To Be Done’

Similarly, Patrick Witt, executive director of the US President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets, discussed the progress on the crypto market structure bill on Friday.

Speaking with Yahoo Finance, Witt stated, “We are working hard to address the issues that were raised that led to the postponement of that markup and hopefully get that back on the book soon.”

He highlighted that lawmakers were able to pass the Senate Agriculture Committee’s half of the CLARITY Act, which handles the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)’s portion of the bill.

The Crypto Council’s executive director outlined that once the Senate Banking Committee’s portion of the bill is passed, the two pieces of legislation will need to be reconciled before a final vote on the Senate floor. “So, more work to be done, but we are a step closer with the passage of the Ag portion of this a couple of weeks ago,” he said.

Discussing who must bend to advance the bill, Witt affirmed that both sides would have to compromise. “It’s unfortunate that this has become such a big issue, because ultimately, this is not the stablecoin bill that was the GENIUS Act,” he said.

“What we’ve encouraged both sides to do is find a middle ground. Let’s use a scalpel heel here to address this narrow issue of idle yield (...). But let’s not take a chainsaw out of this; let’s not let this derail the bill. There is so much goodness in this bill, no matter what your perspective is,” Witt continued.

He listed some of the “excellent measures” proposed in the bill, including the clear line between the SEC and the CFTC, regulatory jurisdiction, and developer protections, which he considers to be “critical to future-proof this industry from a future Gary Gensler or, God forbid, a Secretary of the Treasury Elizabeth Warren.”

Lastly, he shared that the White House might host another meeting between the banking and crypto industry to discuss the payment of stablecoin rewards.

Bitcoin (BTC) trades at $68,258 in the one-week chart. Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView

Preguntas relacionadas

QWho is urging Congress to pass the crypto market structure bill and when?

AUS Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is urging Congress to pass the crypto market structure bill this spring.

QWhat is the name of the specific bill that has been stalled in the Senate?

AThe specific bill is called the CLARITY Act.

QAccording to the Treasury Secretary, why is it important to pass the bill quickly?

AHe believes passing the bill would 'give great comfort' to the market during a time of significant volatility and provide regulatory clarity for the industry.

QWhat potential political event could cause the chances of a deal to 'fall apart'?

AThe chances of a deal could fall apart if Democrats take control of the House of Representatives in November.

QWhich two committees' bills need to be reconciled before a final Senate vote?

AThe bills from the Senate Banking Committee and the Senate Agriculture Committee need to be reconciled.

Lecturas Relacionadas

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片