Galaxy Digital identified seven Democratic senators whose votes may determine whether the CLARITY Act advances through the Senate Banking Committee. With the committee scheduled to mark up the bill on May 14, the vote has become a key regulatory checkpoint for digital-asset market structure in the United States.
The firm’s assessment divides the group into three categories: two broadly pro-framework Democrats, four conditional negotiators and one mixed-position swing vote. That alignment makes Democratic support the critical variable in whether the bill can move toward a full Senate vote with enough bipartisan momentum.
Pro-Framework Democrats Anchor the Negotiations
Ruben Gallego was labeled “constructive/pro-framework,” with Galaxy positioning him as a policy anchor inside the digital-assets subcommittee. His support could help give the bill Democratic credibility if final language addresses outstanding risk and compliance concerns.
Angela Alsobrooks was also described as “constructive/pro-framework,” and credited with helping broker compromises on contested issues such as stablecoin rewards. Her role matters because the rewards language remains one of the bill’s most sensitive pressure points for banks, crypto firms and consumer-protection advocates.
Mark Warner, Catherine Cortez Masto, Andy Kim and Raphael Warnock were classified as “deal-maker/conditional” senators. Galaxy’s mapping suggests this bloc is open to a framework but wants stronger safeguards, particularly around anti-money-laundering controls and illicit finance protections.
Lisa Blunt Rochester was characterized as “mixed,” making her a potential swing vote. Although she is described as supportive of a broader framework, her prior opposition to the GENIUS Act complicates the vote count and keeps the margin narrow.
Jurisdiction, Stablecoins and DeFi Remain Flashpoints
The CLARITY Act seeks to define the boundary between the SEC and the CFTC by treating tokens on sufficiently decentralized blockchains as digital commodities under CFTC oversight. Supporters argue that clearer jurisdiction would reduce legal uncertainty and improve capital formation across the crypto sector.
The bill has faced opposition from several directions. Coinbase withdrew support in January 2026, citing concerns over open-source developer protections, stablecoin yield prohibitions and provisions affecting decentralized finance, showing industry support is not uniform despite the bill’s pro-framework positioning.
Banking trade groups have also pushed back, warning that stablecoin reward structures could divert deposits from traditional banks. Labor organizations, including the AFL-CIO, have raised separate concerns that some provisions could affect retirement fund stability and disproportionately benefit wealthier investors.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has criticized the measure for lacking sufficient consumer protections and potentially increasing financial-stability risk. Her opposition reinforces the broader Democratic concern that market-structure clarity cannot come at the expense of safeguards.
The CLARITY Act passed the House on July 17, 2025, by a 294-134 vote. Its Senate path now depends on committee-level amendments capable of holding together bipartisan support before the bill can clear later procedural hurdles.
Galaxy’s vote map frames the May 14 markup as a decisive negotiation window. If the conditional Democrats secure stronger AML, stablecoin and risk-control language, the bill could advance with a more compliance-heavy implementation pathway for exchanges, wallets and institutional desks.
If those alignments fail, the legislation could stall and extend the current regulatory uncertainty. For market participants, the outcome will shape product design, custody models, counterparty-risk assessments and capital-allocation decisions across the U.S. digital-asset ecosystem.