Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) cautioned Wednesday that pressing the Senate to vote on the CLARITY Act before a bipartisan ethics dispute is settled could “set” the market-structure bill back, even as the Arizona Democrat separately insisted Congress can still pass it.
Gallego, speaking at the SALT Wyoming Blockchain Symposium, said the crypto industry should push Senate Democrats and Republicans to keep negotiating rather than force an early vote. “Don’t go for a fast vote,” he said. “A fast vote gets you a fast result, but I’m not sure it’s the result you want.”
The CLARITY Act would establish a federal framework for digital assets and divide oversight between the SEC and the CFTC. In practice, that means deciding which regulator a token’s issuer answers to, and the line between a security and a commodity under federal law.
The caution arrives as the White House and the crypto industry publicly push the Senate toward a September vote. Senate Majority Leader John Thune scheduled an initial procedural vote for Sept. 15, and White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt previously said the administration would negotiate with Democrats until then but “can’t afford to wait forever.”
Gallego and Republican Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) submitted compromise ethics language to the White House before the congressional recess. Gallego said the White House has not returned a point-by-point response. “We’ve been sending offers over and over again to the White House, and they’ve been coming back either blank, or they’ve come back even slightly further back, or we’ve heard nothing,” he said.
Their latest proposal would let state attorneys general enforce a provision prohibiting public officials and their spouses from issuing or sponsoring digital assets. In July, Trump agreed to an ethics provision blocking a public official or employee and their spouse from issuing or sponsoring digital assets, with the Justice Department enforcing it rather than state AGs. That version carried a sunset clause ending in January 2029. Democrats called it too narrow.
The state-AG enforcement angle is new. Whether the White House accepts it may determine whether enough Democrats support the bill to reach the 60 votes Gallego said it needs to advance out of the Senate. “The way to get to 60 votes is good ethics legislation as well as rounding out some of the things that are still outstanding on the other side of this,” he said.
Open issues beyond ethics include treatment of stablecoin yield and concerns that the bill does not go far enough to combat illicit activity, Gallego said. Lawmakers still need to settle the bill’s Agriculture Committee portion, assemble the broader package, and decide how to send it to the House.
The White House did not respond to requests for comment from either outlet. On Wednesday, Trump appeared alongside crypto executives at the White House and urged Congress to pass a “fair version” of the act.
Gallego framed the risk in two directions. Some on both the left and the right, he said, “would love not to land this plane to make this a political issue.” But, he added, “there are those who want to govern and want to land this plane and continue making sure that we’re innovating in this world.”
“The problem is,” Gallego said, “any premature movement is going to set it back further.”
