‘Attempts to hijack the CLARITY Act are shameful’: Trump advisor slams banks

ambcryptoPublicado em 2026-03-11Última atualização em 2026-03-11

Resumo

White House advisor Patrick Witt criticizes the banking lobby for opposing the pro-innovation CLARITY Act, calling attempts to turn it into an anti-competition bill "shameful." The dispute centers on stablecoin rewards, which banks argue create an uneven playing field and risk deposit flight, potentially reducing bank lending. Stablecoin issuers view restrictions as a threat to their business model and cite competition with China's digital yuan. Lawmakers propose limiting types of stablecoin reward activities as a compromise, but the bill's future remains uncertain without resolution.

The White House continues to express disappointment with the banking lobby’s hardline against the crypto market structure bill, the CLARITY Act.

The two industries, the crypto and banking sectors, have failed to reach an amicable agreement on stablecoin rewards. The stablecoin rewards issue has stalled the bill’s progress since early this year.

At a recent bankers’ summit in Washington, the industry maintained a hardline stance against any compromise on the bill, prompting criticism from the White House.

In response, Trump’s crypto advisor, Patrick Witt, said,

“The CLARITY Act must remain a pro-innovation piece of legislation. Attempts to hijack the legislative process and turn it into an anti-competition bill are shameful.”

Bankers’ plea

Witt’s statement followed Rob Nichols, president of the American Bankers Association, an advocacy group, who framed the current dispute as ‘anti-competitive.’

During the Washington summit, Nichols cautioned,

“Our industry welcomes competition and innovation...what we don’t support is an uneven playing field.”

Since last year, the traditional banking sector has maintained that stablecoin rewards will lead to deposit flight and harm the financial system.

The industry argues that the U.S. stablecoin law, the GENIUS Act, created a loophole that allows intermediaries to share yield with users, thereby bypassing the direct reward ban imposed on issuers.

To mitigate this, banks want the ban extended to intermediaries as well. This would mean amending the GENIUS Act or imposing the ban in the CLARITY Act.

However, stablecoin issuers view this as a threat to their business model. In fact, beyond disrupting their model, supporters view stablecoin yield as a national security issue, citing China’s push in the sector with rewards for digital yuan.

Proposed CLARITY Act compromise

Senators have tried to bring the two sides into a compromise on the issue.

During the banks’ summit, Democrat Senator for Maryland, Angela Alsobrooks, stressed that each faction will be ‘just a little bit unhappy’ but will help push for clear rules for the sector.

“We absolutely have to have these protections to prevent the deposit flight, but we’re going to probably have to make some compromises.”

Congressional Research Service (CRS) estimates that the stablecoin yield could reduce bank lending by $65 billion to $1.26 trillion, because the GENIUS Act prohibits lending of stablecoin reserves. The CRS urged banks to offer higher interest rates to depositors to remain competitive.

The compromise lawmakers have been pushing for is to narrow the types of stablecoin activity crypto platforms can allow to receive stablecoin rewards.

However, the banks’ opposition has faced a series of criticisms from the White House for the past few days. As such, the path forward for the CLARITY Act remains uncertain unless the concerned stakeholders resolve the stablecoin yield issue.


Final Summary

  • White House slammed banks for framing the CLARITY Act as an ‘anti-competition’ bill.
  • The banking industry reiterated its concerns about stablecoin yields during a recent meeting.

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main criticism expressed by Trump's crypto advisor, Patrick Witt, regarding the CLARITY Act?

APatrick Witt criticized attempts to hijack the legislative process and turn the CLARITY Act into an anti-competition bill, stating that such attempts are shameful and that the act must remain a pro-innovation piece of legislation.

QWhy does the banking industry oppose stablecoin rewards according to the article?

AThe banking industry opposes stablecoin rewards because they believe it will lead to deposit flight and harm the financial system, arguing that the GENIUS Act created a loophole allowing intermediaries to share yield with users, bypassing the direct reward ban on issuers.

QWhat compromise have lawmakers proposed regarding stablecoin rewards in the CLARITY Act?

ALawmakers have proposed narrowing the types of stablecoin activity that crypto platforms can allow to receive stablecoin rewards as a compromise to address concerns from both the banking and crypto sectors.

QWhat did the American Bankers Association president, Rob Nichols, say about competition during the Washington summit?

ARob Nichols stated that the banking industry welcomes competition and innovation but does not support an uneven playing field, framing the current dispute over the CLARITY Act as 'anti-competitive'.

QAccording to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), what impact could stablecoin yield have on bank lending?

AThe Congressional Research Service estimates that stablecoin yield could reduce bank lending by $65 billion to $1.26 trillion because the GENIUS Act prohibits lending of stablecoin reserves, and they urged banks to offer higher interest rates to depositors to remain competitive.

Leituras Relacionadas

OpenAI Post-Training Engineer Weng Jiayi Proposes a New Paradigm Hypothesis for Agentic AI

OpenAI engineer Weng Jiayi's "Heuristic Learning" experiments propose a new paradigm for Agentic AI, suggesting that intelligent agents can improve not just by training neural networks, but also by autonomously writing and refining code based on environmental feedback. In the experiment, a coding agent (powered by Codex) was tasked with developing and maintaining a programmatic strategy for the Atari game Breakout. Starting from a basic prompt, the agent iteratively wrote code, ran the game, analyzed logs and video replays to identify failures, and then modified the code. Through this engineering loop of "code-run-debug-update," it evolved a pure Python heuristic strategy that achieved a perfect score of 864 in Breakout and performed competitively with deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms in MuJoCo control tasks like Ant and HalfCheetah. This approach, termed Heuristic Learning (HL), contrasts with Deep RL. In HL, experience is captured in readable, modifiable code, tests, logs, and configurations—a software system—rather than being encoded solely into opaque neural network weights. This offers potential advantages in explainability, auditability for safety-critical applications, easier integration of regression tests to combat catastrophic forgetting, and more efficient sample use in early learning stages, as demonstrated in broader tests on 57 Atari games. However, the blog acknowledges clear limitations. Programmatic strategies struggle with tasks requiring long-horizon planning or complex perception (e.g., Montezuma's Revenge), areas where neural networks excel. The future vision is a hybrid architecture: specialized neural networks for fast perception (System 1), HL systems for rules, safety, and local recovery (also System 1), and LLM agents providing high-level feedback and learning from the HL system's data (System 2). The core proposition is that in the era of capable coding agents, a significant portion of an AI's learned experience could be maintained as an auditable, evolving software system.

marsbitHá 3m

OpenAI Post-Training Engineer Weng Jiayi Proposes a New Paradigm Hypothesis for Agentic AI

marsbitHá 3m

Your Claude Will Dream Tonight, Don't Disturb It

This article explores the recent phenomenon of AI companies increasingly using anthropomorphic language—like "thinking," "memory," "hallucination," and now "dreaming"—to describe machine learning processes. Focusing on Anthropic's newly announced "Dreaming" feature for its Claude Agent platform, the piece explains that this function is essentially an automated, offline batch processing of an agent's operational logs. It analyzes past task sessions to identify patterns, optimize future actions, and consolidate learnings into a persistent memory system, akin to a form of reinforcement learning and self-correction. The article draws parallels to similar features in other AI agent systems like Hermes Agent and OpenClaw, which also implement mechanisms for reviewing historical data, extracting reusable "skills," and strengthening long-term memory. It notes a key difference from human dreaming: these AI "dreams" still consume computational resources and user tokens. Further context is provided by discussing the technical challenges of managing AI "memory" or context, highlighting the computational expense of large context windows and innovations like Subquadratic's new model claiming drastically longer contexts. The core critique argues that this strategic use of human-centric vocabulary does more than market products; it subtly reshapes user perception. By framing algorithms with terms associated with consciousness, companies blur the line between tool and autonomous entity. This linguistic shift can influence user expectations, tolerance for errors, and even perceptions of responsibility when systems fail, potentially diverting scrutiny from the companies and engineers behind the technology. The article concludes by speculating that terms like "daydreaming" for predictive task simulation might be next, continuing this trend of embedding the idea of an "inner life" into computational processes.

marsbitHá 5m

Your Claude Will Dream Tonight, Don't Disturb It

marsbitHá 5m

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片