‘Last Chance’: US Crypto Policy Hits Critical Deadline, Senator Says

bitcoinistОпубліковано о 2026-04-12Востаннє оновлено о 2026-04-12

Анотація

US Senator Cynthia Lummis has warned that the current legislative session is the "last chance until at least 2030" to pass the CLARITY Act, a key piece of market-structure legislation for digital assets. The bill, which aims to provide clear regulatory rules for the crypto industry, faces a critical deadline as November midterm elections threaten to shift congressional priorities. Industry leaders, including Coinbase's Paul Grewal and Brian Armstrong, and a16z Crypto's Chris Dixon, are pushing for its passage, arguing that regulatory clarity will boost innovation and consumer protection. However, a major obstacle remains: a dispute over how to handle stablecoin yield. Despite growing support from companies and some regulators, this unresolved issue could prevent the bill from advancing. The act is seen as a test of Washington's ability to establish crypto regulations before the political window closes.

Coinbase chief legal officer Paul Grewal said the CLARITY Act could be nearing a markup hearing in the Senate Banking Committee, but he tied that progress to one unresolved issue: the dispute over crypto and stablecoin yield.

That came as the broader push for the bill picked up new urgency from lawmakers and industry figures who fear the window for action is closing fast.

Deadline Pressure Builds

US Senator Cynthia Lummis said the country may not get another serious shot at the bill before 2030.

In a post on X on Friday, she said this was the “last chance” to pass the CLARITY Act until at least that year and warned against letting the country’s financial future slip away.

Her warning landed at a sensitive moment. Industry participants have grown more uneasy about the bill’s prospects this year, with November midterm elections threatening to shift congressional priorities and slow work on crypto legislation.

Lummis’ comments framed the fight as one that cannot sit on the shelf much longer.

David Sacks, the former White House AI and crypto czar, echoed that view a day earlier. He said Senate Banking, followed by the full Senate, should pass market-structure legislation and said he believes US President Donald Trump would sign it into law.

Industry Push Gathers Steam

The pressure is not coming from lawmakers alone. Chris Dixon, a16z Crypto’s managing partner, said rules that are clearly defined help both consumers and entrepreneurs.

That line has become a common argument inside the industry, where many firms say clearer oversight would help the US pull in more innovation and more retail demand for crypto assets.

Total crypto market cap currently at $2.4 trillion. Chart: TradingView

That view has spread across different corners of the sector. Immutable founder Robbie Ferguson said on April 3 that the CLARITY Act could make the past decade of gaming growth look small by comparison.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong also shifted his tone on Friday, saying it was time for the bill to move after months of delays.

Stablecoin Fight Still Looms

Even with that momentum, a key problem remains. Grewal said on April 2 that the bill may be close to a Senate Banking Committee markup, but he also said the path forward depends on agreement over stablecoin yield.

That issue has kept the legislation from moving cleanly, even as support has built among companies and some regulators.

Regulators are now adding their voices too. SEC Chairman Paul Atkins said the time had come for Congress to move market-structure legislation to Trump’s desk and to protect the system from what he called rogue regulators.

The CLARITY Act has since become a test of whether Washington can settle crypto rules before the political calendar closes in.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the name of the crypto legislation that US Senator Cynthia Lummis says is facing a 'last chance' to pass before 2030?

AThe CLARITY Act.

QAccording to the article, what is the key unresolved issue that is holding up the progress of the CLARITY Act?

AThe dispute over crypto and stablecoin yield.

QWhich US President does the article mention as someone who would potentially sign the market-structure legislation into law?

APresident Donald Trump.

QWho is cited in the article as saying that clearly defined rules help both consumers and entrepreneurs?

AChris Dixon, a16z Crypto's managing partner.

QWhat event is threatening to shift congressional priorities and slow down work on crypto legislation this year?

AThe November midterm elections.

Пов'язані матеріали

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

The article "a16z: AI's 'Amnesia' – Can Continual Learning Cure It?" explores the limitations of current large language models (LLMs), which, like the protagonist in the film *Memento*, are trapped in a perpetual present—unable to form new memories after training. While methods like in-context learning (ICL), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and external scaffolding (e.g., chat history, prompts) provide temporary solutions, they fail to enable true internalization of new knowledge. The authors argue that compression—the core of learning during training—is halted at deployment, preventing models from generalizing, discovering novel solutions (e.g., mathematical proofs), or handling adversarial scenarios. The piece introduces *continual learning* as a critical research direction to address this, categorizing approaches into three paths: 1. **Context**: Scaling external memory via longer context windows, multi-agent systems, and smarter retrieval. 2. **Modules**: Using pluggable adapters or external memory layers for specialization without full retraining. 3. **Weights**: Enabling parameter updates through sparse training, test-time training, meta-learning, distillation, and reinforcement learning from feedback. Challenges include catastrophic forgetting, safety risks, and auditability, but overcoming these could unlock models that learn iteratively from experience. The conclusion emphasizes that while context-based methods are effective, true breakthroughs require models to compress new information into weights post-deployment, moving from mere retrieval to genuine learning.

marsbit1 год тому

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

marsbit1 год тому

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

An individual manipulated a weather sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport with a portable heat source, causing a Polymarket weather market to settle at 22°C and earning $34,000. This incident highlights a fundamental issue in prediction markets: when a market aims to reflect reality, it also incentivizes participants to influence that reality. Prediction markets operate on two layers: platform rules (what outcome counts as a win) and data sources (what actually happened). While most focus on rules, the real vulnerability lies in the data source. If reality is recorded through a specific source, influencing that source directly affects market settlement. The article categorizes markets by their vulnerability: 1. **Single-point physical data sources** (e.g., weather stations): Easily manipulated through physical interference. 2. **Insider information markets** (e.g., MrBeast video details): Insiders like team members use non-public information to trade. Kalshi fined a剪辑师 $20,000 for insider trading. 3. **Actor-manipulated markets** (e.g., Andrew Tate’s tweet counts): The subject of the market can control the outcome. Evidence suggests Tate’sociated accounts coordinated to profit. 4. **Individual-action markets** (e.g., WNBA disruptions): A single person can execute an event to profit from their pre-placed bets. Kalshi and Polymarket handle these issues differently. Kalshi enforces strict KYC, publicly penalizes insider trading, and reports to regulators. Polymarket, with its anonymous wallet-based system, has historically been more permissive, arguing that insider information improves market accuracy. However, it cooperated with authorities in the "Van Dyke case," where a user traded on classified government information. The core paradox is reflexivity: prediction markets are designed to discover truth, but their financial incentives can distort reality. The more valuable a prediction becomes, the more likely participants are to influence the event itself. The market ceases to be a mirror of reality and instead shapes it.

marsbit2 год тому

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

marsbit2 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片