Two months ago, I predicted Democrats would find some reason to not vote for Clarity even if Trump agreed to their demands. The reason: they refuse to give Trump any type of legislative victory before the midterms. Career politicians in Washington only care about partisan politics and gaining control of the government. Period. Everyone knows that I’m not a Trump guy - which allows me to make the point - they hate Trump and despise him being reelected so much - that if America was burning to the ground - and it was Trump who held the water hose to put the 🔥 out - they’d turn off the water. #PeopleOverPolitics#

I will fucking curse the Democratic party to my very grave. If you are in crypto and support the Democrats in any way, you're not in crypto. And watch how they run the same anti-crypto playbook on AI now.

Today’s outcome is deeply disappointing. For months, Republicans and the White House negotiated in good faith in an effort to build bipartisan support for legislation that would provide clear rules of the road for digital assets. This was a missed opportunity to protect consumers, support American innovation, and provide much-needed regulatory certainty. It is unfortunate that partisan politics ultimately prevented the Senate Democrats from moving forward. But the need for clarity has not gone away. I encourage the SEC and CFTC to move forward within their respective authorities to provide the certainty American innovators, investors, and consumers deserve.

There’s no sense in sugarcoating it: today’s vote was a major disappointment—and, I believe, a failure of American leadership. The full cost of today’s result may not be known for years to come, but this much is clear: it increases the risk that the standards that global financial markets adhere to in the future will be those of Brussels or Beijing, rather than Washington and New York. I want to thank @POTUS for the opportunity to work on this important legislation and for the remarkable concessions he was willing to make to give this bill a chance; @DavidSacks for his wise leadership on not only crypto but all frontier tech policy; and all the Senators and their staffs who devoted countless hours to working on this bill, chief among them @SenLummis who deserved much better than this. Lastly, I also want to thank my colleagues across the administration at Treasury, SEC, and the CFTC. Their partnership helped us find creative solutions to challenging issues throughout this process, and their patience made it possible for us to see it all the way through to a vote. On that last point: @SECPaulSAtkins and @ChairmanSelig, you’re up!

Today, @SenateDems refused to give Clarity a final vote. America should be the leader in cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Democrats are ceding the ground to our foreign adversaries. The American people deserve better, and now they know where Democrats stand after a year of back and forth negotiations. Shameful!

Elizabeth Warren and the Democrats blocked the Clarity Act because they’d rather obsess over President Trump’s personal finances than establish the necessary guardrails to secure American leadership in digital assets. Even though @POTUS and Senate Republicans have negotiated with them for months in good faith, they couldn’t take off their TDS-tinted glasses to even debate or improve the bill. The choice in front of us is simple: create a market structure for digital assets at home to protect Americans’ involvement in the industry or watch Americans risk their money in unsafe foreign countries led by less than noble leaders. American financial innovation and ingenuity must be protected by an American legal framework. Given Democrats’ obstruction, the administration should use its authority to finalize appropriate market structures for investors in digital assets.

Democrats have stood in the way of making life more affordable by voting against no taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security. Today, they have another chance to stick up for hardworking Americans and expand opportunity by voting for the Clarity Act.

Today, Senate Democrats blocked the vote to advance the CLARITY Act. I’m deeply disappointed at this outcome. For more than a year, Republicans and Democrats worked together in good faith to develop a clear, responsible regulatory framework for digital assets. The legislation before the Senate today incorporated substantive changes requested by Democrats, real concessions designed to address concerns from both sides of the aisle and build a durable bipartisan framework. The status quo leaves consumers and investors worse off and cedes U.S. financial leadership overseas. At a time when our global competitors are racing ahead, American entrepreneurs, investors, consumers, and financial institutions in Pennsylvania and across the U.S. deserve clear rules of the road that protect consumers while allowing innovation to flourish here at home. This issue isn’t going away, and neither is my commitment to getting it done. Community banks and entrepreneurs in PA and across America are worse off without CLARITY. I’ll continue working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to deliver the certainty America needs to remain the global leader in financial innovation.

If the DC banking lobby were serious about their deposit flight argument, they would be aggressively whipping Senators, both Republican and Democrat, to get on the bill and then push for changes after. Because if this bill fails, they get none of the protections they claim to desperately need. They haven’t done that. Draw your own conclusions.

We keep hearing stablecoins will somehow drain bank deposits. The White House @CEA47 dispelled that myth again. The deposit stays in the system, it only moves. Banning yield outright barely helps lending (0.02%!) and costs households ~$800M a year (!). The numbers don't lie. Despite all this, CLARITY 10404 already addresses purported deposit flight risk and now has a "regulatory circuit breaker," letting the Treasury Secretary to initiate a rulemaking if / when such a deposit flight actually occurs. If it's already here (which it clearly isn't), Treasury acts right away, and the circuit breaker addresses this. If it isn't happening, then the concern was never real to begin with. So which is it? Either way, Section 10404 already speaks directly to the concern.