What's next for Clarity

Clarity didn't die in August, but its path forward got harder.

When Congress returns from recess, discussion around Clarity is expected to pick back up. Everyone still wants to see a bill get done this year. That gives lawmakers several more weeks to resolve the issues that kept the bill from moving before recess. For The Ledger Project, one stands out: stablecoin yield.

What to know before then

Before leaving for August recess, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) set up a procedural vote on Clarity on September 15, the day after the Senate returns. That vote will not determine the bill's success, only whether the Senate can move to debate. Senate Republicans have shown more willingness to move the bill forward, but the final vote breakdown isn't clear. If Republicans remain united, they would need at least seven Democratic votes to reach 60, though other bipartisan configurations remain possible.

The question in Washington has turned from "when" to "if" Clarity can be passed this year. Following the decision to punt the vote, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) told reporters Friday that the likelihood "probably drops in half on getting it done."

Key issues to watch

1. An ongoing stablecoin-yield fight
   
   As it stands, the bill would let stablecoin issuers effectively operate interest-bearing savings accounts — without providing any of the associated consumer protections and pulling funding away from the institutions that support Main Street lending. If trillions of dollars move out of insured deposits and into yield-bearing stablecoins, that credit doesn't flow back into the economy. That would mean fewer loans and higher borrowing costs as banks face higher funding costs and have fewer deposits available to support lending, reducing the availability of mortgages and loans to small businesses, farms, and consumers. Communities across the country would face real economic pressure as credit becomes harder and more expensive to access.
   Recently, some Republicans have expressed opposition to the bill's current language for that exact reason. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS) have both indicated they will vote against the bill because of the concern that any yield or incentives on stablecoin holdings could pull deposits away from banks and credit unions. Congress has the chance to close this loophole in September. We think it should.
   
2. An unresolved ethics provision
   Senate Democrats continue to object that the current language does not go far enough to reduce the potential for public officials to profit from crypto holdings while in office.
   
3. An unforgiving congressional calendar
   Many experts expected an imminent floor vote after the bill passed Senate Banking in early summer. But September brings a narrow floor window, competing legislative priorities, and the midterm campaign calendar. Even if the Senate clears its first procedural hurdle, any Senate-passed version that differs from the House bill will still need House action before it can become law.
   

The Clarity Act can add meaningful guardrails to the market.

CLARITY can still deliver an important framework for digital assets. But the goal isn’t just a bill — it’s a good bill. The final rules should strengthen America’s entire financial system, not create regulatory advantages that shift risk or weaken access to credit. That means closing the stablecoin-yield loophole before it can encourage deposits to migrate out of the regulated banking system and reduce the funding available for lending. How Congress tackles stablecoin yield will help determine whether CLARITY strengthens trust in the financial system — or undermines it.

We’ll be watching closely as the Senate returns in September.

For more updates like this, sign up for The Ledger Project’s emails here.