Early this morning, a Michigan senator shared her reasoning for voting against the Clarity Act. By the way, she's a Democrat. She opposed this version of the CLARITY Act for three main reasons: 1. The restrictions on conflicts of interest for public officials are too weak. She believes the bill doesn't sufficiently prevent the president, their family members, and cabinet members from profiting through crypto-related businesses. She also emphasized that such restrictions should apply to future Democratic officials as well. 2. Anti-money laundering and national security measures are inadequate. She thinks stronger tools are needed to block illegal funds and prevent terrorist organizations, as well as countries like North Korea and Iran, from using crypto channels for financing. 3. Regulatory agencies lack enforcement capabilities. Agencies like the CFTC currently don't have enough resources or personnel to effectively implement the bill. That said, she also expressed support for the U.S. maintaining its leadership in crypto innovation and acknowledged some bipartisan provisions in the bill. She's willing to continue working on revisions and pushing it forward. This shows that at least some Democratic senators are open to supporting the development of cryptocurrency in the U.S. From what I've seen, the most critical point raised by speakers revolves around the first issue. @Gate Crypto, U.S. stocks, Hong Kong stocks, Korean stocks, gold, CFDs, prediction markets—all in one platform for trading.