Post

#CLARITY法案推进受阻，参议院分歧扩大 Continuing from the clue mentioned yesterday, there is a new development today. On August 3, Senate Majority Leader Schumer officially confirmed that the CLARITY Act will have a formal Senate vote before the recess. This wording has been upgraded from "should vote" to "already scheduled," which is a substantial progress. But I have to be clear, being scheduled for a vote and passing are two completely different things. This time, the threshold is not a simple majority but 60 votes, a bipartisan hurdle. The Republicans need to secure support from about seven Democrats. The sticking point remains the old issue: Senators Murphy, Van Hollen, and Merkley have officially expressed opposition because the latest merged version of the bill removed the ethics clause they requested, which restricts senior officials from having business dealings with the crypto industry. Procedurally, the current pace is that if the motion to end debate is submitted today, August 5, the earliest vote on whether to enter formal debate will be on Friday, August 7. This is only a procedural vote, not the final passage. The Senate will have only four working days left in Washington. Polymarket's probability of passage within the year is now between 30% and 33%, roughly the same level as the 35% I mentioned yesterday. There has been no obvious rebound due to Schumer's scheduling confirmation, indicating the market does not believe that merely being scheduled for a vote substantially increases the chance of passage. What everyone cares more about is whether those seven Democratic votes can be secured. I personally interpret Schumer's move more as an accountability gesture than substantive progress. Even if the vote fails this time, it will put the positions of each undecided Democratic senator on the table, facilitating subsequent accountability or pressure. This itself is a political maneuver, not purely aimed at passing the bill. #CLARITY法案推进受阻，参议院分歧扩大 $USDC