Senators Signal Progress On Crypto Market Structure Bill Amid Key Vote Delay

bitcoinistDipublikasikan tanggal 2026-01-16Terakhir diperbarui pada 2026-01-16

Abstrak

Despite a delay in the markup for the CLARITY Act, a key crypto market structure bill, lawmakers remain optimistic about its passage. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott described the postponement as tactical, emphasizing ongoing negotiations and bipartisan cooperation. However, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong withdrew support, raising concerns that the bill could restrict tokenized equities, DeFi, and expand government surveillance while shifting regulatory power to the SEC. White House crypto czar David Sacks urged the industry to resolve disagreements during the delay, noting that legislative progress is closer than ever. Experts and officials agree that federal regulation is essential for both innovation and consumer protection in the crypto market.

Despite a surprising postponement of the markup for the crypto market structure bill known as the CLARITY Act, lawmakers are maintaining a hopeful outlook for the passage of the legislation.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott announced the delay on Wednesday, stating that bipartisan negotiations are ongoing. He characterized the pause as tactical rather than indicative of failure.

Coinbase CEO Voices Alarm Over CLARITY Act’s Potential Impact

In a message on social media platform X (previously Twitter), Scott expressed confidence, noting, “I’ve spoken with leaders across the crypto industry, the financial sector, and my Democratic and Republican colleagues, and everyone remains at the table working in good faith.”

In an interview with Fox News prior to the cancellation of the markup, Scott noted that the Republican Party has made significant efforts to incorporate bipartisan support into the legislation.

“We’ve taken over 90 of the Democrats’ priorities and filtered them,” he explained. Scott highlighted key issues, such as anti-money laundering (AML) measures, which are important to both parties, aligning on national security concerns.

However, the momentum faced a setback when Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong withdrew the company’s support for the CLARITY Act in its current form.

Armstrong raised concerns that the bill could prohibit tokenized equities, impose restrictions on decentralized finance (DeFi), and expand government access to financial data at the expense of individual privacy.

The executive also cautioned that the legislation could shift power from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and eliminate stablecoin rewards, potentially sidelining crypto competition.

Crypto Czar Urges Industry To Resolve Differences

Following the postponement of the vote, White House crypto czar David Sacks urged the industry to use this delay to address any remaining disagreements. “Passage of market structure legislation remains as close as it’s ever been,” Sacks stated on X.

The Trump administration continues to express a commitment to collaborating with Scott, the Senate Banking Committee, and industry stakeholders to advance bipartisan crypto legislation as swiftly as possible.

Although the specifics of the bill are still under negotiation, there is widespread consensus among both asset managers and experts that federal intervention is crucial not only for the growth of cryptocurrency but also for consumer protection.

Kyle Wool, CEO of Dominari Securities, shared his perspective, stating, “As newer, more fringe industries grow and capital increases, there will be a greater need for oversight from regulators.”

He outlined that proper regulations should not stifle innovation but instead ensure that markets remain fair, honest, and efficient for all investors. Wool added that such measures would also make the crypto market accessible to a broader audience, enhancing liquidity and depth.

Pro-crypto Senator Cynthia Lummis, who has been an advocate for the growth and development of the digital asset industry, asserted that lawmakers are now “closer than ever,” with ongoing negotiations leaning toward a bipartisan agreement.

The daily chart shows the total crypto market cap drop following the markup delay. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView.com

Pertanyaan Terkait

QWhy was the markup for the CLARITY Act postponed, and how did lawmakers characterize this delay?

AThe markup for the CLARITY Act was postponed to allow for ongoing bipartisan negotiations. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott characterized the delay as a tactical pause rather than a sign of failure, stating that everyone remains at the table working in good faith.

QWhat were the main concerns raised by Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong that led to the withdrawal of support for the bill?

ABrian Armstrong raised concerns that the bill could prohibit tokenized equities, impose restrictions on decentralized finance (DeFi), expand government access to financial data at the expense of privacy, shift regulatory power from the CFTC to the SEC, and eliminate stablecoin rewards.

QWhat did White House crypto czar David Sacks urge the industry to do following the postponement?

AFollowing the postponement, David Sacks urged the crypto industry to use the delay to address any remaining disagreements, noting that the passage of market structure legislation remains as close as it's ever been.

QAccording to the article, what is the general consensus among asset managers and experts regarding federal intervention in crypto?

AThere is a widespread consensus that federal intervention is crucial not only for the growth of the cryptocurrency industry but also for consumer protection.

QWhat perspective did Dominari Securities CEO Kyle Wool share about regulation in the crypto industry?

AKyle Wool stated that as newer, fringe industries grow, there will be a greater need for regulatory oversight. He outlined that proper regulations should ensure markets remain fair, honest, and efficient without stifling innovation, thereby making the market accessible to a broader audience and enhancing liquidity.

Bacaan Terkait

The Impossible Triad Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

**Judul: Segitiga Mustahil Sebenarnya Masalah Palsu** Industri crypto telah membangun sistem kriptografi paling kuat, tetapi ironisnya gagal melindungi privasi keuangan pengguna. Setiap transaksi dan kepemilikan terpapar secara publik. Blokchain pada dasarnya adalah komputer bersama yang lambat dan mahal, yang nilainya terletak pada akses tanpa izin dan konsensus terdesentralisasi. Selama satu dekade, industri terobsesi dengan "trilema" skalabilitas, keamanan, dan desentralisasi. Namun, kendala sebenarnya yang menghalangi masuknya modal triliunan dolar justru adalah **legalitas** dan **privasi**. 1. **Legalitas:** Sifat tanpa izin menciptakan ketidakpastian hukum. Namun, perkembangan regulasi seperti Undang-Undang GENIUS di AS mulai memberikan kejelasan kerangka hukum. 2. **Privasi:** Transparansi rantai publik bukanlah fitur, melainkan **pajak**. Setiap posisi dan transaksi yang terbuka mengundang eksploitasi seperti MEV (Miner Extractable Value), yang telah menyedot miliaran dolar dari pengguna biasa. Modal institusional besar tidak akan pernah menempatkan neracanya di tempat yang bisa dibaca pesaing secara real-time. Solusinya bukan transparansi penuh atau penyembunyian total. Kriptografi modern memungkinkan **privasi yang patuh (compliant privacy)**. Kita dapat membuktikan suatu pernyataan (misalnya, kecukupan cadangan, kepatuhan KYC, transaksi bersih) tanpa membongkar data dasarnya. Audit dan kepatuhan tetap terjaga, tetapi kebocoran informasi dan "pajak transparansi" dihilangkan. Dengan menutup dua cacat ini—melalui kemajuan regulasi dan adopsi privasi yang dapat dibuktikan—blokchain akan mengalami peningkatan murni. Ia akan berubah dari "spreadsheet Google yang mahal dan terbuka" menjadi mesin bersama yang dapat dipercaya yang akhirnya dapat menjaga rahasia. Inilah jembatan yang akan membawa sistem keuangan bernilai triliunan dolar ke dalam dunia yang sebenarnya dirancang untuknya sejak awal.

marsbit6j yang lalu

The Impossible Triad Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

marsbit6j yang lalu

Chip Optik, Perluasan Kapasitas Produksi Secara Kolektif

Kebutuhan chip optik sedang melonjak, memicu gelombang ekspansi kapasitas global di seluruh rantai pasokan. Di AS, Coherent memperluas pabrik 6 inci InP di Texas dengan pendanaan pemerintah, didukung investasi strategis dari Nvidia. Nokia menambah kapasitas pengujian dan pengemasan chip fotonik. Di Jepang, JX Advanced Metals berinvestasi besar untuk meningkatkan produksi substrat InP hingga 7-10 kali lipat. Di Eropa, IQE dan Tower Semiconductor menyepakati kesepakatan pasokan wafer epitaksial InP jangka panjang, menandakan konvergensi antara platform silicon photonics dan material III-V. Di Cina, perusahaan seperti Suzhou Ray Technology (Soluxe) dan San'an Optoelectronics secara agresif memperluas produksi chip optik dan bahan baku seperti InP. Ekspansi ini didorong oleh permintaan bandwidth yang meledak dari pusat data AI, terlepas dari jalur arsitektur masa depan seperti CPO (Co-Packaged Optics). Laporan Morgan Stanley menekankan bahwa kebutuhan konten optik akan terus tumbuh, baik dengan modul pluggable tradisional, NPO, CPO, atau arsitektur hybrid. Berbagai rute sumber cahaya seperti SiPh + Laser CW, VCSEL, dan MicroLED diperkirakan akan hidup berdampingan untuk aplikasi jarak berbeda dalam pusat data. Pada dasarnya, ini adalah perlombaan kapasitas global di mana AS membangun kembali manufaktur domestik, Jepang menguasai bahan baku, Eropa mendorong integrasi heterogen, dan Cina dengan cepat mengembangkan rantai pasokan terintegrasi secara vertikal. Perlombaan senjata di era fotonik telah memasuki tahap intensif.

marsbit9j yang lalu

Chip Optik, Perluasan Kapasitas Produksi Secara Kolektif

marsbit9j yang lalu

1996 atau 1999? Ujian Pertama Wash adalah 'Bagaimana Melihat AI'

Artikel ini membahas dilema utama yang dihadapi ketua Federal Reserve terbaru, Christopher Warsh, dalam menanggapi ledakan AI. Inti persoalannya adalah apakah kemajuan AI saat ini mirip dengan situasi 1996 — di mana Alan Greenspan membiarkan ekonomi tumbuh tanpa menaikkan suku bunga karena percaya pada pertumbuhan produktivitas — atau lebih mirip 1999, ketika Greenspan akhirnya menaikkan suku bunga secara agresif untuk mencegah overheating ekonomi. Warsh cenderung pada pendekatan 1996, berargumen bahwa manfaat produktivitas AI membutuhkan waktu untuk terlihat dalam data resmi, dan menaikkan suku bunga terlalu dini justru dapat meredam pertumbuhan yang sebenarnya membantu menekan inflasi. Namun, konteks makroekonominya berbeda: tekanan tarif, defisit fiskal yang membesar, dan memudarnya manfaat globalisasi membuat risiko inflasi lebih tinggi daripada era 1990-an. Di sisi lain, kritikus seperti Austan Goolsbee dari Bank Sentral Chicago berpendapat bahwa ledakan AI yang sudah diantisipasi banyak orang justru dapat memicu kenaikan pengeluaran di muka, mendorong overheating ekonomi dan mengharuskan kenaikan suku bunga yang lebih tajam nantinya. Perdebatan ini mencerminkan perpecahan internal di Fed. Paradoks terakhir bagi Warsh adalah keinginannya untuk menghapus "forward guidance" (panduan kebijakan ke depan), suatu praktik yang justru dibuat pada 1999. Jika ekonomi memburuk, ia harus memilih antara menggunakan alat yang ingin dihapusnya atau menghadapi gejolak pasar akibat ketidakpastian. Jawaban atas semua ini bergantung pada penilaiannya: apakah kita berada di tahun 1996 atau 1999?

marsbit11j yang lalu

1996 atau 1999? Ujian Pertama Wash adalah 'Bagaimana Melihat AI'

marsbit11j yang lalu

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片