Connect with us

Published

on

Senate stablecoin vote splits Democrats amid concerns over corruption

US Senate Democrats are getting flak after they helped move stablecoin legislation ahead for discussion on the Senate floor.

On May 19, 16 Democratic senators broke from the party line to pass a motion to invoke cloture, which will now set the bill up for debate on the Senate floor. Some of the same Democrats had held up the bill in early May when they withdrew support, citing corruption concerns over President Donald Trump’s cryptocurrency dealings.

The bill’s opponents hailed lawmakers’ refusal to support it but were soon taken aback when the senators reversed their position. The lightly amended legislation contained no provisions regarding World Liberty Financial, the Trump family’s crypto venture.

Some activists have said that the Democrats supporting the bill should be ousted in the upcoming Democratic primaries in 2026, reflecting a growing rift in the Democratic Party over cryptocurrencies.

Law, Politics, Congress, United States, Stablecoin, Features
The Senate voted 66-32 to move the bill ahead. Source: Stand With Crypto

Democratic lawmakers’ approach to crypto shows split in party

On May 19, moderate Democratic Senator Mark Warner announced he would support the bill, stating that it was “not perfect, but it’s far better than the status quo.”

Warner set corruption concerns aside, stating, “Many senators, myself included, have very real concerns about the Trump family’s use of crypto technologies to evade oversight […] But we cannot allow that corruption to blind us to the broader reality: blockchain technology is here to stay.”

Warner concluded it would be better for the US to move forward on imperfect stablecoin legislation than to fall behind other jurisdictions. 

Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, one of the bill’s sponsors, also pushed aside Trump corruption concerns, saying they should be addressed separately. 

Related: US Senate moves forward with GENIUS stablecoin bill

“A lot of what President Trump is engaged in is already illegal,” she said, adding that she didn’t want the president’s scandals to “distract us from the important goal of having a clear regulatory structure in the United States that can onshore this industry.”

During the vote, progressive Democrats disagreed. Senator Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee and a vocal critic of the crypto industry, reportedly got into a heated argument with Gillibrand on the Senate floor.

Warren argued on the Senate floor ahead of the vote, “A bill that turbocharges the stablecoin market, while facilitating the President’s corruption and undermining national security, financial stability, and consumer protection is worse than no bill at all.”

Democrats opposing the bill aren’t giving up either. Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, who voted against the GENIUS Act, immediately introduced another bill, jokingly named “the STABLE GENIUS Act,” combining the names of the bills in the Senate and House of Representatives.

The bill would prevent the president, vice-president and members of Congress from “issuing or endorsing digital assets” and require them to place any assets they hold in a blind trust while in office.

While the bill has little chance of passing — numerous acts that would limit members’ of Congress financial activities have fizzled out — it shows the Democrats are split on how they should provide opposition.

Democratic activists lambast Democratic GENIUS supporters

The progressive and activist wings of the Democratic party have roundly criticized Congressional leadership for compromising with Republicans on measures that, they claim, should be deal breakers. 

In March, activists were enraged when Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York and minority leader in the Senate, voted with the Republicans on a continuing resolution for government funding. One progressive observer accused him of giving up leverage and weakening the Democratic position. 

Then, in April, disagreements over how Democrats should fight Trump’s mass deportations further deepened the rift. 

Now, crypto has become another wedge between the activist wing, which provides crucial voter activation during elections, and centrists in Congress.

Ezra Levin, co-founder and co-executive director of progressive activist organization Indivisible, wrote on BlueSky:

Senate stablecoin vote splits Democrats amid concerns over corruption
Ezra Levin commenting on crypto bill. Source: Ezra Levin

Communications strategist Murshed Zaheed, who formally worked for the offices of Senator Harry Reid and Representative Louise Slaughter, urged people to call their senators to come out against the bill.

“Any Democrat who votes for this today — should never be taken seriously again if they send out emails, text and do videos […] talking a big game about Trump’s corruption,” he said.

Related: What to expect at Trump’s memecoin dinner

Chris Kluwe, a former American football player who has since become a prominent activist within Democratic politics, said on May 20 he was “excited to get a chance to speak at the CA state Dem convention on May 31st, I’m sure [the bill] won’t come up at all in the 4 minutes I’ve been allotted.”

On BlueSky, labor researcher and media law historian Peter Labuza posted “Primary List” in reply to a post of the 16 Democratic senators who helped support the bill.

The subject of primary elections, the intra-party elections to decide who will represent the party in a given district, has also grown contentious.

On May 12, the Democratic National Convention (DNC) voted to void the results of an internal party vote nominating David Hogg as a vice chair. The decision essentially strips Hogg of his title at the DNC and, with it, the ability to promote his controversial policy of sponsoring progressive challengers in Democratic primary elections. 

Hogg had planned to spend $20 million to support progressive and young candidates in Democratic Party primaries as part of the “Leaders We Deserve” campaign — an activist group that aims to elevate younger leaders with a more combative tone against the Trump administration. 

With the stablecoin bills in the House and Senate poised to move ahead, the Democrats seem ill-suited to mount an effective opposition to the bills. Internal struggles and interests within Congress have disunited lawmakers, while activists want a new crop of congresspeople to represent them next term.

In the Democratic Party’s internal battle between the anti-crypto progressive wing and the pro-crypto pragmatists, the latter is winning out, so far. 

Magazine: Father-son team lists Africa’s XRP Healthcare on Canadian stock exchange

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

Published

on

By

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

The CARF regulation, which brings crypto under global tax reporting standards akin to traditional finance, marks a crucial turning point.

Continue Reading

Politics

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

Published

on

By

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

The nascent real-world tokenized assets track prices but do not provide investors the same legal rights as holding the underlying instruments.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn

Rachel Reeves has hinted that taxes are likely to be raised this autumn after a major U-turn on the government’s controversial welfare bill.

Sir Keir Starmer’s Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill passed through the House of Commons on Tuesday after multiple concessions and threats of a major rebellion.

MPs ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to universal credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.

Initially aimed at saving £5.5bn, it now leaves the government with an estimated £5.5bn black hole – close to breaching Ms Reeves’s fiscal rules set out last year.

Read more:
Yet another fiscal ‘black hole’? Here’s why this one matters

Success or failure: One year of Keir in nine charts

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Rachel Reeves’s fiscal dilemma

In an interview with The Guardian, the chancellor did not rule out tax rises later in the year, saying there were “costs” to watering down the welfare bill.

“I’m not going to [rule out tax rises], because it would be irresponsible for a chancellor to do that,” Ms Reeves told the outlet.

More on Rachel Reeves

“We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement.

“So we’ll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.”

Meanwhile, The Times reported that, ahead of the Commons vote on the welfare bill, Ms Reeves told cabinet ministers the decision to offer concessions would mean taxes would have to be raised.

The outlet reported that the chancellor said the tax rises would be smaller than those announced in the 2024 budget, but that she is expected to have to raise tens of billions more.

It comes after Ms Reeves said she was “totally” up to continuing as chancellor after appearing tearful at Prime Minister’s Questions.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why was the chancellor crying at PMQs?

Criticising Sir Keir for the U-turns on benefit reform during PMQs, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the chancellor looked “absolutely miserable”, and questioned whether she would remain in post until the next election.

Sir Keir did not explicitly say that she would, and Ms Badenoch interjected to say: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”

In her first comments after the incident, Ms Reeves said she was having a “tough day” before adding: “People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday.

“Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Reeves is ‘totally’ up for the job

Sir Keir also told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby on Thursday that he “didn’t appreciate” that Ms Reeves was crying in the Commons.

“In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,” he said. “That’s what it was yesterday.

“And therefore, I was probably the last to appreciate anything else going on in the chamber, and that’s just a straightforward human explanation, common sense explanation.”

Continue Reading

Trending