To be honest, I never read through the most recently updated text, so I am not sure if the ethics language is going to be good enough for the Dems. What I can say, though, is that if the Dems want anything done for the next 2 years, or anything that targets Trump, this is their last chance.
Let's say that they flip the House and the Senate. Trump would still have to sign any legislation, and the Dems won't get a veto-proof majority in either chamber.
Now, assuming the Senate passes the bill this week, which is far from guaranteed, the House is only in session 5 weeks every 4 days, the rest of the time Congress is not in session. The Senate would have to move very fast and, most importantly, put forth something the House could reasonably pass. None of this is a given, and in fact each is a long shot, with each long shot compounding on the others.
Realistically though. It's the Dems' one chance to do this for the next two years. The Republicans have worked with them and compromised enough that if they want this done, they will do it.
Witt is projecting confidence, Lummis hinting at some game theory
We've bounced a bit on news of the vote, but probably not insiders yet, reckon we'll find out tomorrow after the ETF's wake up.
Timing probably critical as Bessent needs to start dumping heavy treasury bags onto stablecoin holders, insiders could move the treasury market tomorrow too along with Bitcoin
Not passing has potential to be entertaining, but generally the circus is boring and the bread is stale. Time for a new news cycle.
Who is Witt?
This legislation won’t affect stable coins much. it could from the DeFi aspect but my understanding is the Banks and Credit Unions lost that battle. Beyond yields genius act established stable coins.
I’m not sure that punting it would affect the markets because it would lock in the status quo for another two years. It’s passing it that could send the markets up or down.
It's huge for stables, what did you reckon the fuss was all about? Trad banks fighting it.
It lets brokers in, cftc over sec, and a loophole for yield for money-market type uses.
My understanding was it was the credit unions and local banks more than the large major ones. There was a fear that community banks in rural areas would face capital flight and that, in turn, would affect farmers and the agriculture industry in general. From what I read about small community banks, there could, in theory, be an issue with this facing them, but it is highly likely to be a nothingburger in reality. It was something that Congress, as part of due diligence, should have looked at and they did.
The other big one was the ethics provisions. NGL what the Dems wanted was wild in that they wanted the ethics provisions to be retroactive and force Trump to sell whatever his crypto company is called. There was also stuff about his family being forced to sell out to...
What I found so wild about it was it wasn't like moving forward you can't do x,y,and z. There is also the whole thing of the way the Dems had it written; it was clearly targeting a single person, meanwhile Congress still trades individual stocks, sooooo it realistically wasn't going to happen.
deleted by author
Hopefully it doesn't pass.
I’m curious since I haven’t read the bill what part or parts are you against?
It is fairly tough on new protocols to prove they are decentralized which of course they can’t but gives a free pass to existing protocols which are also not decentralized to be grandfathered in and bypass the strenuous evaluation.
I call it the shitcoin free pass bill.
I get why they’re pushing back on it. A law should apply to everyone equally.