The debate in the United States Senate over the Encrypted Market Structure Act continues to rise. Democrat Senator Chris Murphy stated at the National Assembly Hill Press Conference on July 14, that the bill, in its current version, could not prevent the President from profiting from the encryption industry being regulated by Congress.

The Democrats are demanding the addition of ethical restrictions.

Murphy stated that the bill was in fact protecting the encoded commercial interests of Trump. Jeff Merkley and Chris Van Hollen, who were with him at the press conference, also requested that a clearer conflict of interest restriction be added before the next phase of the bill.

Several parliamentarians suggested that the bill should expressly prohibit the President, Vice-President, Members of Parliament and their immediate family members from profiting from encryption operations that might be affected by future regulation. In their view, in the absence of such provisions, the legislation itself would face a clear conflict of interest.

The parliamentarians also mentioned that, according to the Trump financial disclosure documents, encryption projects operated by their families had become an important source of revenue for filing, which had further heightened the controversy.

The Senate will start its deliberations this week.

With the completion of the text of the bill, the Senate ' s voting schedule became the focus of market attention. Senator Cynthia Lummis stated on 15 July that the version, which had been prepared jointly by the Senate Banking Commission and the Agriculture Commission, had been completed and was to be submitted to the Senate for consideration.

Under the current arrangements, the Senate may initiate ground procedures between 15 and 20 July. If the majority leader, John Thune, is put on the agenda as soon as possible, the bill will be in its final stages of advancement; if negotiations on conflict of interest clauses continue, deliberations may also be postponed.

At the core of CLARITY Act is the division of responsibilities for the regulation of digital assets between the United States Commodity Futures Exchange Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, together with the inclusion of consumer protection provisions and the restriction of United States Central Bank digital currency-related arrangements.

Industry continues to support the bill.

Despite increased political controversy, organizations and enterprises in the encryption industry are still pushing for the passage of the bill. Senior Coinbase stated that the United States needed clearer rules for encryption to maintain the market competitiveness of digital assets and compete with regions such as Europe and China.

The continuing interest of the market in the bill is due to the fact that many institutions and analysts regard United States regulatory clarity as an important condition for further access to the encrypted market for institutional funds. Some traders also see XRP as one of the assets that is more sensitive to the progress of the Act because it has long been the focus of regulatory disputes.

Next, whether the Senate will include in the final text the restrictions on conflict of interest demanded by the Democrats will be a key point of view for the smooth progress of the bill.