Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent urged the Senate on Thursday to immediately vote on the CLARITY Act, accusing Democrats of delaying the crypto market structure bill for political reasons ahead of the August recess. The legislation cleared the House more than a year ago but has stalled in the Senate, where Majority Leader John Thune has indicated it is unlikely to pass before lawmakers leave for recess.
“It's disappointing—but not surprising—that Senate Democrats are choosing politics on the cusp of a major victory for American leadership,” Bessent said, framing the bill's passage as a milestone for U.S. competitiveness in digital assets rather than a routine regulatory update.
What the bill would do
Bessent characterized the CLARITY Act as strengthening, not weakening, consumer protections and anti-money laundering standards, while establishing a clear division of regulatory oversight between the SEC and the CFTC. That framing puts him directly at odds with Democratic critics who argue the bill's protections fall short.
Sticking points remain over proposed “ethics provisions” that would bar federal officials from issuing their own digital assets, with those restrictions currently drafted to expire in 2029 — a sunset clause that has drawn criticism from lawmakers who want the limits made permanent.
Related: Police Chiefs Group Backs CLARITY Act Ahead of August Recess
Closing with Nakamoto's own words
Bessent ended his appeal by quoting Bitcoin's pseudonymous creator directly, citing Satoshi Nakamoto's line: “If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.” The quote, pulled from Nakamoto's original correspondence about Bitcoin, was deployed as a rhetorical closing argument aimed at lawmakers still undecided on the bill.
A narrowing window
With Thune signaling the bill likely won't reach a vote before recess, supporters are running out of time to secure passage before the Senate's attention shifts to the midterm campaign season. Opponents, including several Senate Democrats, have continued to raise concerns about enforcement mechanisms and the scope of federal preemption over state-level crypto oversight.
