The US Senate is scheduled to consider a cloture motion at 2:15pm ET on Tuesday on whether to invoke cloture on a motion to proceed to the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, H.R. 3633. The procedural vote is the first major test of whether the bill can attract enough bipartisan support to reach formal debate.
Today’s Senate vote requires 60 votes to invoke cloture. With 53 Republicans, supporters would need at least seven votes from Democrats or Democratic-caucusing independents if every Republican supports the motion; any Republican defections would raise that number. The bill cleared the Senate Banking Committee 15-9 in May, with Democrats Angela Alsobrooks and Ruben Gallego joining Republicans. Both signalled their committee votes didn’t guarantee floor support, and Senate leaders have since worked to win the additional backing needed.
What the CLARITY Act would do
If enacted, the bill, formally H.R. 3633, would create statutory categories for digital commodities and digital-asset securities, dividing primary oversight between two regulators. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission would take primary oversight of spot trading in digital commodities, while the Securities and Exchange Commission would keep jurisdiction over digital assets that behave like securities. Exchanges, brokers, dealers and custodians would face new federal registration requirements, with a lighter-touch self-certification process for networks that meet specified decentralisation criteria.
The revised draft released ahead of Tuesday’s vote extends that reach: crypto trading protocols controlled by identifiable people or groups, including some “decentralised in name only” platforms, would have to register with the CFTC and comply with the Bank Secrecy Act. Protocols meeting the bill’s decentralisation criteria would be treated differently under the revised draft.
The bill also preempts conflicting state digital-asset rules. A bipartisan group of 18 state attorneys general and the District of Columbia’s attorney general warned the provision could restrict their ability to bring fraud and scam cases against crypto firms.
A revised ethics package aims to win over Democrats
A major point of dispute through the August recess was whether officials could profit from digital assets while in office. Senate Republicans released a revised draft of more than 630 pages late on Sunday, and Senator Cynthia Lummis, one of the bill’s lead sponsors, said it included more than 120 of Democrats’ requested changes, with the Trump administration agreeing to the new ethics restrictions.
Under the revised text, the president, vice-president, members of Congress and their spouses would be barred from issuing or sponsoring a digital asset, or from holding a significant financial interest in one, unless they divest it or place it in a qualified blind trust. The revised ethics language also reflects negotiations involving Senators Thom Tillis and Ruben Gallego, and state attorneys general would gain new authority to enforce the rules, with penalties reaching the greater of $500,000 or 20% of the relevant financial interest.
Warren has rejected the package regardless. Earlier this year, in a statement issued through the Senate Banking Committee’s Democratic minority office, she called an earlier version of the bill one “written by the crypto industry to protect and advance the crypto industry.”
Her opposition has continued through the latest round of ethics revisions: Crypto Briefing reported that Warren dismisses the new guardrails as designed for political cover rather than substantive protection, and that she wrote to Senate leaders in July urging a full ban on officials profiting from crypto while in office.
Banks warn on deposit flight
The revised bill keeps a provision letting companies pay loyalty rewards tied to stablecoins. Eight banking trade groups, including the American Bankers Association, the Bank Policy Institute and the Independent Community Bankers of America, wrote to Senate leadership on 14 September arguing the rewards function like deposit interest and could pull money out of community banks: “Congress should address this risk upfront by ensuring the Clarity Act prohibits payment stablecoin rewards and incentives that function like deposit interest.”
Brooke Ybarra, an ABA senior vice president, told CNBC the group remained hopeful the Senate would consider “an improved Clarity Act that embraces innovation without undermining the economy.”
The revised draft responds with a partial concession rather than the ban the banks wanted: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent would get temporary authority, lasting 18 months, to restrict stablecoin rewards if community banks see substantial deposit outflows. The Block quoted Bessent as saying he would not hesitate to use those tools to protect community banks if stablecoins caused them harm.
What happens next
If cloture passes, the Senate would move to formal debate and amendments on the House-passed bill, followed by a final passage vote. If it fails, Majority Leader John Thune would need to find another route forward, more than a year after the House first approved the legislation. Coinbase chief executive Brian Armstrong told CNBC that a defeat would still be “a good outcome” for the industry, since the SEC and CFTC have said they are ready to publish their own rules regardless of how the Senate votes.
