The United States Encrypted Market Structures Act, Clarity Act, which failed to enter the voting process before the August recess, was placed on the Senate agenda in mid-September. Former New York State Governor Andrew Como's latest public appeal for Congress to move forward as soon as possible, stating that the United States was behind in encryption regulation.
Como claims that companies need to clearly regulate their borders.
On August 18th, at the SALT Conference in Jackson Hall, Komo stated that Congress should bridge its differences as soon as possible and establish clear rules for the digital asset industry. In his view, a firm would be more sure to build and invest in the United States only if it had a clear understanding of the regulatory boundaries.
The core element of CLARITY Act is to establish a federal-level regulatory framework for digital assets and to further delineate which encryption products are regulated by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and which are the responsibility of the United States Commodity Futures and Exchange Commission (CFTC).
Komo also indicated that if this work were to be left to the federal institutions for a long time, policies might be adjusted repeatedly as political power changes in Washington, D.C., making long-term decision-making more difficult for businesses.
The Senate will vote on September 15th.
The Senate majority leader John Thune has scheduled a procedural vote on the bill at 2 p.m. on September 15th. This vote belongs to the customary vote, the procedural vote required to close the debate and move the bill to the next stage.
This was not a vote on the bill eventually becoming law, but it was considered a key test. If we are to move forward, the bill will require 60 votes of support, which means that, in addition to the Republican party, some Democrat parliamentarians will still have to go backwards.
In May this year, CLARITY Act was adopted by the Senate Banking Commission by 15 to 9, but cross-party coordination remains a major challenge after entering the House process.
Ethical terms and the issue of stable currency are still on the table.
Controversies currently hampering agreements are concentrated on ethical protection provisions, stable currency incentive mechanisms and enforcement rules. The report mentioned the desire of Democrats to add stronger ethical limits and the related discussion extended to President Trump ' s encryption interests.
Komo stated that the Democratic Party ' s concerns were not unfounded, but that those differences should not justify the stagnation of the bill. He stressed that legislation ultimately needed to build trust and integrity.
External expectations suggest that the market continues to judge with caution that the bill became law in 2026. The projection that the market currently offers a probability of about 20 per cent suggests that even after the September procedural vote, the bill continues to have considerable resistance.