Add to Google Preferred Sources
House Republican leaders have canceled eight September voting days, cutting the chamber’s remaining session to just four days before representatives leave Washington on Sept. 17. The calendar change sharply reduces the odds that the CLARITY Act, comprehensive digital asset market legislation, can clear Congress before the Nov. 3 midterm elections. The Senate is expected to hold a cloture vote on Sept. 15 that would open debate rather than pass the bill, and any Senate amendments would require additional House action. Negotiations remain unresolved on stablecoin rewards, crypto ethics provisions, and other issues. Polymarket traders now place the probability of enactment in 2026 at roughly 17 percent, down from about 20 percent in August. If the bill remains unfinished when the current Congress ends, lawmakers would have to restart the process next session. The SEC is advancing separate crypto rulemaking, including Regulation Crypto Assets, that does not depend on the legislation’s passage.
Key Elements
The window for Congress to deliver comprehensive crypto market regulation to President Donald Trump before the November midterms has narrowed dramatically after House Republican leaders wiped two full weeks from the September voting calendar.
The decision cuts eight legislative days at a moment when the Senate is preparing to begin formal debate on its version of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, also known as the CLARITY Act. With representatives now scheduled to depart Washington on Sept. 17, just two days after the Senate’s expected procedural vote, the odds of completing the multi-step legislative process before Election Day have fallen sharply.
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer’s office informed Republican
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer’s office informed Republican members that leadership had removed the weeks of Sept. 21 and Sept. 28 from the schedule. The chamber will return after Labor Day for four voting days before recessing until after the Nov. 3 midterms. Leadership did not cite the crypto bill as the reason for the calendar change.
Even if the Senate advances its version, the legislation cannot reach the White House without additional House action. The House passed its own bill, H.R. 3633, in 2025 by a bipartisan 294-to-134 vote. Senators have since developed a separate text with provisions absent from the House measure, meaning any Senate passage would trigger either House approval of the changes or a negotiation process to reconcile the two drafts.
A procedural hurdle, not a final vote
The immediate checkpoint is a cloture vote expected on Sept. 15. That vote requires 60 senators to agree to open debate on the bill. Clearing the threshold would allow formal consideration to begin, but it would not constitute passage. Senators could still offer amendments, hold additional procedural votes, and demand further debate before a final vote on the full measure.
Senate Republicans cannot reach the 60-vote threshold without
Senate Republicans cannot reach the 60-vote threshold without Democratic support. Negotiations have touched on presidential crypto ethics provisions, anti-money-laundering requirements, state enforcement authority, treatment of decentralized finance, and the structure of stablecoin rewards.
Miller Whitehouse-Levine, chief executive of the Solana Policy Institute, had previously placed the bill’s chance of becoming law before the midterms at roughly 10 percent. He pointed to the limited number of legislative days and unresolved Senate negotiations as the primary obstacles. The calendar change appears to validate that assessment.
Stablecoin rewards remain a flashpoint
Among the thorniest issues in the Senate text is the treatment of stablecoin rewards. The draft would bar payments based solely on holding a stablecoin balance while permitting rewards tied to transactions or other activity. That distinction carries significant implications for how exchanges structure yield products.
Banks contend that activity-based incentives could allow crypto
Banks contend that activity-based incentives could allow crypto platforms to offer bank-like returns without facing the same capital, liquidity, and regulatory requirements as insured depository institutions. Crypto companies counter that a strict ban would choke off legitimate revenue-sharing arrangements and dampen competition in dollar-backed payments.
The dispute follows the GENIUS Act, which established federal rules for payment stablecoin issuers but left questions about third-party distribution unresolved. Those unresolved questions have now migrated into the CLARITY Act negotiations.
Prediction market participants have marked down the bill’s prospects. Polymarket traders now place the probability of enactment during 2026 at approximately 17 percent, down from about 20 percent in August, when more than $7.2 million was wagered on the contract. The platform’s prices reflect trader positioning rather than a formal legislative forecast.
A separate Polymarket contract gives Democrats about
A separate Polymarket contract gives Democrats about a 90 percent chance of winning the House and roughly 52 percent odds of taking the Senate. Those figures could influence whether party leaders prioritize the crypto bill in a lame-duck session.
If the current Congress ends without a signed bill, lawmakers would have to restart the process from scratch in the next session. A post-election lame-duck window could theoretically offer another opportunity, but floor time would depend on how the midterms reshape the balance of power in both chambers.
SEC presses ahead on separate track
SEC Chair Paul Atkins has remained publicly optimistic about the Senate process despite the narrowing calendar. In a recent Fox News interview, he described the CLARITY Act as the most significant step toward cementing America as the crypto capital of the world and urged Congress to send the measure to the President’s desk.
The commission has also advanced rulemaking that does
The commission has also advanced rulemaking that does not depend on the bill’s fate. In August, the SEC proposed Regulation Crypto Assets, a 402-page framework covering token offerings and qualifying investment contracts. The proposal includes two fundraising exemptions: one allowing eligible issuers to raise up to $5 million over 12 months, and another permitting offerings of up to $75 million under enhanced disclosure and investor-protection requirements.
The framework also proposes a safe harbor under which qualifying tokens could cease being treated as investment contracts after meeting decentralization and disclosure conditions. Because the proposal remains subject to public comment and possible revisions, it has not created a final exemption for issuers.
The commission is separately preparing guidance known as the Innovation Exemption for tokenized securities. Atkins has said the measure could give companies a regulated route to test blockchain-based financial products, though tokenized stocks and bonds would remain subject to federal securities laws.
The CLARITY Act would divide digital asset oversight
The CLARITY Act would divide digital asset oversight between the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission while establishing registration rules for crypto trading platforms. It would also prohibit government officials and their spouses from holding or promoting cryptocurrencies while in public office.
For Bitcoin and the broader digital asset market, the stakes are significant. Clearer and more predictable U.S. regulation could encourage banks, institutions, and financial firms to increase their crypto exposure. Greater regulatory certainty may also bolster investor confidence and reinforce Bitcoin’s commodity status. Conversely, another failed legislative cycle would leave the industry operating under the patchwork of enforcement actions and agency rulemaking that has defined the past several years.
Once added, BigGo Finance appears first in Google Search Top Stories, so you get the broadest, most up-to-the-minute, and most comprehensive global financial news first.
