Crypto industry advocate Cody Carbone has renewed calls for lawmakers to advance the CLARITY Act as Senate debate over the legislation continues without a scheduled floor vote.
Summary
- Cody Carbone urged lawmakers to advance the CLARITY Act, arguing crypto can lower payment and transaction costs.
- The bill faces opposition from anti-trafficking advocates and gambling industry groups over regulatory concerns.
- Ric Edelman said up to 95% of institutions without crypto exposure could enter the market if the CLARITY Act becomes law.
According to testimony delivered by Carbone, chief executive of The Digital Chamber, at a Senate Banking Committee hearing on affordability, digital assets can help lower costs for consumers through faster transactions, reduced payment fees, and easier access to financial assets.
Speaking before lawmakers during a hearing titled The Affordability Agenda, Carbone argued that blockchain-based financial services could introduce competition to traditional payment networks and reduce friction in moving money and assets. Despite those arguments, most senators at the hearing did not directly engage with his comments on cryptocurrency.
Among the few lawmakers to address the topic, Senator Jim Banks questioned Carbone about the costs associated with international remittances and how stablecoins pegged to the U.S. dollar compare with existing payment methods.
Senator John Kennedy, while expressing support for cryptocurrency, suggested that digital assets were not the primary factor behind the country’s affordability challenges.
Carbone’s appearance comes as the Senate weighs the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, commonly known as the CLARITY Act, which seeks to establish a regulatory framework for digital assets in the U.S. Although lawmakers are expected to consider the bill in the coming weeks, Senate leadership has not yet scheduled a floor vote.
Senate debate extends beyond market structure
Fresh concerns have emerged as senators review the legislation. On June 23, the Alliance to End Human Trafficking (AEHT) urged Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to revisit Section 604 of the bill.
In a letter to lawmakers, the organization argued that the provision, which incorporates the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, could make it more difficult for authorities to track financial activity connected to crimes such as human trafficking.
According to the group, stronger anti-money laundering protections should be added before the legislation advances. The concerns add to existing discussions in Congress over ethics provisions that some lawmakers have said should be included in the final version of the bill.
Pressure has also come from outside the crypto sector. Gambling industry organizations recently asked the Senate to clarify that the legislation would not expand the authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission over sports betting conducted through prediction market platforms.
The debate follows an ongoing dispute between the CFTC and prediction market operators such as Kalshi and Polymarket, with the regulator maintaining that it has exclusive jurisdiction over those markets.
Industry groups see legislation as key to adoption
While lawmakers continue discussing revisions, some industry figures have linked the bill’s progress to future institutional participation in digital assets.
Ric Edelman recently argued that regulatory uncertainty remains one of the main reasons large pools of capital have not entered the crypto market despite growing activity among financial firms.
According to Edelman, institutions including BlackRock, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, Franklin Templeton, State Street, Invesco, and Fidelity continue expanding blockchain and tokenization initiatives even as cryptocurrency prices struggle to maintain momentum.
Edelman has predicted that as many as 95% of institutions that currently lack crypto exposure could enter the market if the CLARITY Act becomes law. He also cited Bitcoin ETF outflows and opposition from lawmakers such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren as factors that have contributed to investor caution.
