White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt said on September 14 that he felt "very good" about the chances of the CLARITY Act bill in the Senate — a day before a procedural vote that required 60 votes.

As it turned out, the vote on September 15 failed with a score of 49 to 50.

What was said before

Speaking at a conference in Washington, Witt called the latest version of the document "the best and final proposal" and said that Republicans agreed to approximately 95% of Democratic negotiators' demands.

He characterized the remaining opposition as political rather than substantive: "Whether we get 60 votes or not will be a political calculation, not a substantive one".

According to him, the president personally approved additional concessions on ethical provisions after meeting with advisers. Witt called the current formulations "the strongest provision that would exist in federal ethics legislation".

What the ethical standards provided

The revised bill gave state attorneys general the power to:

  • prosecute crypto exchanges for listing improper assets;
  • hold the U.S. Attorney General accountable for ethics violations.

However, state prosecutors could not directly prosecute the president, vice president, members of Congress, and federal judges.

Democratic banking committee staff called this limitation insufficient and noted that administration appointees retained too much authority to stop enforcement.

How the document was prepared

A significant detail: Republicans made the updated draft public without coordinating changes with Democratic negotiators. This explains why statements about "95% of demands met" did not translate into votes.

Both banks and crypto industry opposed it

A coalition of banking associations sent senators a letter about provisions concerning stablecoin yields. In their view, the wording contained loopholes allowing interest payments on deposits, which could cause a withdrawal of funds from traditional banks.

Witt called these concerns "entirely hypothetical and speculative".

At the same time, the crypto industry expressed concerns about new wording on decentralized finance. References to a provision protecting software developers who do not control user funds were removed from the document.

What's next

Even if the 60-vote threshold was reached, the bill would face additional amendments and return to the House of Representatives, which might not convene before the November elections.

This episode is instructive for assessing regulatory forecasts: statements by government officials about high bill chances a day before voting did not prove to be a reliable indicator of the outcome.

Those tracking the crypto market should remember that regulatory news is often priced in by the market in advance — and the market's reaction to the actual decision is often weaker than to expectations.

This material is for informational purposes only and is not investment advice.