Stand With Crypto will score recorded votes on the CLARITY Act at the May 14 Senate Banking markup. Polling shows 52% support for the bill, and 70% of voters want clear crypto legislation.
Alpha Score of 58 reflects moderate overall profile with moderate momentum, moderate value, moderate quality, moderate sentiment.
Stand With Crypto will score recorded votes on the CLARITY Act at the Senate Banking Committee’s May 14 markup, adding political risk for senators who oppose advancing the digital asset market structure bill. The group said on May 11 it represents more than 2.9 million U.S. advocates, turning a procedural committee vote into a public accountability test. The bill, H.R.3633, would create a regulatory framework for digital commodities, splitting oversight between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The markup is the next step for legislation that could reshape how crypto tokens are classified and traded in the United States.
Stand With Crypto’s scorecard tracks lawmakers’ positions on crypto issues. Scoring a markup vote means a “no” vote will be recorded and publicized to its advocate base. The group says its advocates have contacted lawmakers nearly 1.5 million times over several years. This is not a passive mailing list; it is an active mobilization tool. A negative score could be used in primary challenges or general elections, especially given the 2.9 million figure. The group explicitly urged a “yes” vote to advance the bill out of committee.
“On behalf of more than 2.9 million U.S. advocates, Stand With Crypto is notifying senators that it will score the Senate Banking Committee’s May 14th markup vote on the CLARITY Act.”
The statement also said: “SWC strongly urges senators to vote ‘Yes’ to advance the bill out of committee. Please note that lawmaker scores will be updated based on these recorded votes.” The direct link between the vote and the scorecard removes ambiguity. Senators know a “no” vote will be visible to a large, motivated constituency. The 1.5 million contacts figure underscores that this advocacy network has been built over years, not weeks. It represents a durable political force that can influence primary and general election outcomes.
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (H.R.3633) would establish a regulatory system for digital commodities. It assigns the SEC and CFTC distinct roles, aiming to end the jurisdictional ambiguity that has left many tokens in legal limbo. The bill would define which digital assets are commodities, subject to CFTC oversight, and which fall under SEC jurisdiction. It also includes restrictions on central bank digital currencies, a provision that could attract support from privacy advocates and those wary of government-controlled digital money.
For traders, the bill’s advancement would signal that a legislative solution is moving forward. It could reduce the regulatory overhang that has suppressed institutional participation in crypto markets. The markup is not a final vote. Advancing out of committee is a necessary hurdle, however. Failure here would stall the bill indefinitely, leaving the current enforcement-driven approach intact.
Stand With Crypto’s campaign did not start on May 11. On April 28, the group called for Senate Banking action on the bill. It later delivered a petition to Washington after more than 28,000 Americans signed it that week. The petition framed the markup as the next procedural step for digital asset rules.
Harrisx polling released on May 7 added another layer. It showed 52% support for the CLARITY Act after voters reviewed a summary. The survey also found 70% said the U.S. should already have clear crypto legislation, while 60% preferred federal legislation over case-by-case enforcement. These numbers give senators cover to vote yes, framing it as responding to voter demand. The polling suggests that crypto legislation is not a niche issue; it has broad public backing.
Senator Bernie Moreno criticized bank opposition before the session. He cited the American Bankers Association’s outreach to bank CEOs. His comments connected the CLARITY Act discussion with broader arguments over competition, yield access, and control across digital asset policy. A senator willing to publicly call out the ABA may signal that some Republicans see crypto legislation as a populist issue. That could influence committee dynamics, especially if other members view bank lobbying as an attempt to stifle innovation.
The CLARITY Act directly affects tokens that could be classified as digital commodities. Bitcoin and Ethereum are already widely considered commodities. Their status would be reinforced. The real impact is on tokens currently in limbo, where the SEC has brought enforcement actions alleging they are unregistered securities. The bill would create a registration and oversight path, potentially unlocking exchange listings, institutional custody, and derivatives markets. This would be a structural shift from the current environment, where regulatory clarity comes only through court rulings or settlements.
For traders, the markup vote is a binary catalyst. A “yes” to advance increases the probability of eventual passage, which would be a tailwind for the broader crypto market. A “no” or a delay would extend the current uncertainty, where enforcement actions drive market moves. The vote also matters for crypto-related equities, such as exchanges and miners, whose business models depend on regulatory clarity.
The scoring pressure itself reduces the risk of a “no” vote. Senators facing reelection or with crypto-friendly constituents will want to avoid a negative score. The polling data showing broad support for legislation also lowers the political cost of voting yes. If committee leadership schedules the markup with a clear path to a majority, the bill is likely to advance.
The risk of failure is further reduced if the stablecoin dispute does not derail the markup. Senator Moreno’s criticism might rally pro-crypto senators to support the bill as a counter to bank influence. The key is whether any senator places a hold or offers a killer amendment. No specific opposition within the committee has been reported, so the immediate risk appears contained.
A delay of the markup or a public statement of opposition from key senators before the vote could overwhelm the scoring threat. The American Bankers Association’s lobbying might sway some members, especially if they frame the bill as a threat to financial stability. A surprise “no” vote from a senator previously seen as supportive would rattle markets, signaling deeper political resistance.
If the stablecoin debate spills over and creates a broader impasse on digital asset legislation, the CLARITY Act could get caught in the crossfire. The 2.9 million advocates are a force. Committee votes are often decided by a few members, however. Any sign that the scoring pressure is being dismissed would increase the risk of a negative outcome.
The May 14 markup is a recorded test that will either validate the political momentum behind crypto legislation or expose its fragility. Traders should watch for any senator’s statement ahead of the vote. That will be the best signal of the outcome.
Drafted by the AlphaScala research model and grounded in primary market data – live prices, fundamentals, SEC filings, hedge-fund holdings, and insider activity. Each story is checked against AlphaScala publishing rules before release. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.