Sen. Marshall Drops Card Fees Push From Crypto Bill Markup

TheNewsCryptoPubblicato 2026-01-27Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-01-27

Introduzione

Senator Roger Marshall has withdrawn his proposed amendment on credit card swipe fees from the crypto market structure bill to avoid jeopardizing its progress. The Senate Agriculture Committee is prioritizing a focused debate on digital asset regulation, and Marshall’s amendment—aimed at increasing competition in card network fees—was seen as a potential distraction that could provoke opposition from financial institutions and disrupt bipartisan support. The markup, delayed from late January to early February due to weather and scheduling conflicts, is part of a broader effort to advance the bill without contentious additions. Both Democratic and Republican negotiators are working to keep the legislation clean to ensure it moves forward amid a crowded legislative agenda. The bill includes key provisions on crypto commodities and securities definitions and software developer protections. Marshall’s tactical retreat is viewed as a strategic move to maintain momentum and improve the bill’s chances of committee approval and eventual Senate debate.

Republican Senator Roger Marshall intends to put his proposed credit card swipe fees amendment on the back burner as the Senate Agriculture Committee gears up for a markup of a significant crypto market structure bill. Legislators are determined to keep the bill’s scope on digital asset regulation rather than financial sector conflicts. Reports indicate Marshall privately agreed to step back after concerns emerged that the amendment could derail momentum behind the bill.

Marshall originally filed the proposal to increase competition around card network fees. However, negotiators feared the move would spark resistance from financial institutions and distract from crypto policy. This shift comes as Washington intensifies debate around digital asset frameworks, a topic recently highlighted in coverage on US lawmakers’ debate crypto oversight framework and stablecoin regulation gaining traction in Congress.

Weather Delays and Political Timing

The Senate Agriculture Committee had set the markup for late January but later rescheduled it for early February due to severe winter storms that affected operations in Washington. However, weather conditions are only one factor for the delay. Another significant factor is the political timing of the bill. The Senate Agriculture and Banking Committees are still modifying their schedules in an effort to gain bipartisan support.

Legislators recognize that if the bill includes any contentious amendments, it could disrupt the bipartisan process. Therefore, they are now focusing on stability and progress rather than expanding the bill’s scope.

White House and Party Strategy

Representatives from the White House have been involved in negotiations regarding the timing of the markup of the bill. They are trying to ensure that the bill passes without any amendments that might draw attention away from crypto. Party strategists also consider the election calendar.

Republicans want policy wins ahead of the upcoming elections, while Democrats push for stronger ethics and consumer protection language.

Some Democrats supported Marshall’s swipe-fee language, yet several Republicans opposed it. They argued the amendment would trigger a fresh fight between banks and retailers. That dispute could overshadow core crypto provisions and stall progress.

Focus Returns to Core Crypto Oversight

The Senate Agriculture Committee version of the bill contains provisions to protect software developers and to distinguish between commodities and securities. However, the Senate Banking Committee has not yet set the date for its markup of the bill. Experts track developments through official sources such as the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee and the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, where procedural updates define the future of the bill.

Experts point out that the crypto bill is progressing in a crowded legislative environment. Members of Congress are dealing with funding deadlines, economic policies, and election politics. Each change in focus can change committee agendas. Thus, the current preference is for a clean bill that does not contain contentious provisions.

A Strategic Pause, Not a Retreat

Marshall’s action is part of this approach. He takes a step back to allow leaders to keep their attention on the digital asset market structure rather than card network reform. Negotiators believe this move increases the odds of committee approval and eventual Senate floor debate.

Crypto regulation remains a moving target in Washington. Nevertheless, lawmakers continue refining proposals and negotiating compromises. For now, leaders push the bill forward without policy riders that risk slowing progress.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Crypto Debanking Deepens in the UK as 40% of Exchange Transactions Face Bank Blocks

TagsCrypto BillCrypto Marketcrypto regulationfinanceSwipe

Domande pertinenti

QWhy did Senator Marshall decide to withdraw his proposed credit card swipe fees amendment from the crypto bill markup?

ASenator Marshall withdrew the amendment after concerns emerged that it could derail momentum behind the crypto bill and spark resistance from financial institutions, potentially distracting from the core focus on digital asset regulation.

QWhat were the two main reasons for the Senate Agriculture Committee rescheduling the markup of the crypto bill from late January to early February?

AThe markup was rescheduled due to severe winter storms affecting Washington operations and the political timing considerations as committees worked to gain bipartisan support for the bill.

QHow are White House representatives involved in the crypto bill negotiations according to the article?

AWhite House representatives have been involved in negotiations regarding the timing of the markup, trying to ensure the bill passes without amendments that might draw attention away from crypto policy.

QWhat key provisions does the Senate Agriculture Committee's version of the crypto bill contain?

AThe bill contains provisions to protect software developers and to distinguish between commodities and securities in the digital asset market.

QWhy is there a preference for a 'clean bill' without contentious amendments in the current legislative environment?

AThere is a preference for a clean bill because Congress is dealing with multiple priorities including funding deadlines, economic policies, and election politics, and contentious provisions could disrupt bipartisan progress and change committee agendas.

Letture associate

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手2 h fa

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手2 h fa

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit5 h fa

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit5 h fa

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手6 h fa

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手6 h fa

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit7 h fa

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit7 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片