
Cody Carbone, CEO of The Digital Chamber, said new ethics language sent to the White House Monday is the bottleneck. Realistic goal: get procedural votes next week to set up September passage.
New bipartisan ethics language sent to the White House Monday has become the single obstacle blocking Senate action on the CLARITY Act, according to Cody Carbone, CEO of The Digital Chamber. Passage this week was never realistic, he said.
The language, drafted by Senators Thom Tillis and Ruben Gallego along with other Democratic senators, focuses on President Trump. Democrats need to show their base they pushed to limit the president's ability to profit from digital assets before agreeing to advance the bill, Carbone said.
Two provisions stand out. Democrats want state attorneys general given a formal enforcement role rather than leaving oversight solely to the president's own US attorney general. They also want the president to divest any money he has made from crypto.
"This bill has become solely about ethics, which is unfortunate," Carbone said. The underlying CLARITY Act runs 616 pages, creating what he called a foundational regulatory framework for digital assets. That broader scope is overshadowed by the ethics dispute.
The CLARITY Act odds had already sunk to 27% after earlier Senate delays. Carbone said the bill's path forward now hinges on how the White House responds to the ethics language in the coming days.
Even under a best-case scenario, he said, there simply is not enough time for the bill to clear both chambers this week. The House is already out of session, meaning any Senate passage this week could not reach the House floor regardless.
He walked through why the process takes longer than most people assume. A motion to proceed must get the bill onto the Senate calendar first. A Senate cloture vote requires 60 votes and at least 30 hours of debate beforehand, on top of expected amendments. Given the timeline, Carbone said the realistic goal is narrower: get procedural votes moving next week and set the bill up so that when the Senate returns in September, only a final passage vote and a single House vote remain before the president's desk.
Carbone was blunt about the stakes of inaction. If voting does not begin next week, he said, the bill likely loses its chance to move forward this year entirely. September offers only three weeks of session. October is gone entirely. After that comes the election and a lame duck period, a sequence that leaves little room for delay.
Asked whether Senate leadership might cancel the August recess to force the issue, Carbone said he would be shocked if that happened. In an election year, he said, senators from both parties need to be home campaigning. Retaining the majority in November matters more to both sides than any single piece of legislation, CLARITY included. He described recess-cancellation talk as "good theater" rather than a serious possibility.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.