White House cryptocurrency adviser Patrick Witt pushed back against critics of the Clarity Act on Thursday, calling it a “pro-regulatory, pro-enforcement bill” despite objections from law enforcement groups who say it falls short on financial crime protections.
The remarks came during a virtual town hall hosted by the Blockchain Association, which earlier this week sent a letter urging passage of the bill signed by 160 former security officials.
Racing the clock
Lawmakers are pressing hard to pass the sweeping digital asset legislation before midterm elections later this year leave only a narrow window for action.
Senator Cynthia Lummis warned that if the bill fails this year, it may not be taken up again until 2030.
She stated at the town hall:
“We want to push this through because we know not only is time a-wasting, but that this is the most highly negotiated bipartisan or nonpartisan, sophisticated piece of a regulatory framework for digital assets that’s ever been presented to the public in this country.”
Witt echoed the urgency, saying:
“Money is moving faster globally, and if we are not setting standards as the United States, then we are going to be receivers of somebody else’s playbook.”
AML provisions under fire
A central point of contention is the bill’s anti-money laundering standards and a provision called the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, which would clarify that non-custodial developers are not money transmitters.
Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto voted against the Clarity Act last month, arguing it “undermines law enforcement’s ability to trace illicit finance and recover victims’ money.”
Witt said lawmakers have responded to those concerns by adding new sections to the bill ahead of the Senate Banking Committee vote last month.
Trump’s crypto ties a wildcard
Beyond AML disputes, the bill has faced other hurdles over the past year, including a fight between banks and crypto firms over stablecoin rewards.
President Trump’s own crypto ventures, which have generated millions for him personally, remain an unresolved issue that could still jeopardize the legislation’s path forward.
