Senate lines up major step toward passing stablecoin bill
The Senate is poised to hold another key procedural vote on stablecoin legislation Wednesday, clearing the way for the crypto bill after several controversial amendments threatened to complicate its path forward.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) moved to end debate Monday on the updated text of the GENIUS Act, struck as part of a bipartisan agreement after two weeks of frantic negotiations last month between Republicans and crypto-friendly Democrats.
The move appears to end Thune's push to pass the bill via so-called 'regular order,' which would have opened up floor proceedings on the stablecoin legislation to dozens of amendments in a lengthy process that risked derailing final passage.
'I think at this point it's a good thing, because the longer it sat around, the more people picked at it, and it would have died from death by 1000 cuts, if we would have waited longer,' Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) told The Hill on Tuesday.
'And I think that Sen. Thune was seeing that, and so he decided to move forward just with the changes that were made in negotiations with the Democrats,' she continued, noting that she expects the updated text to be the final version of the bill.
A Senate aide said Tuesday that no final decision had been made yet on amendments but underscored that the timeframe was shrinking ahead of Wednesday's vote.
A key point of contention has been the Credit Card Competition Act (CCCA), which Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) offered up as an amendment. However, it seems increasingly unlikely that the bill will get a vote as part of the GENIUS Act.
'There's a couple of GOP Senators who wish to avoid a vote on CCCA at all costs, and an open amendment process on this was a major threat to that end,' a senior GOP staffer familiar with what transpired told The Hill.
'Obviously, Leader Thune ran the calculus, and ultimately decided to toss the process out in order to move on Genius,' they continued. 'There's very little Senator Marshall can do at this point, disappointed as he likely is.'
The CCCA seeks to take aim at credit card swipe fees — the fees charged to retailers every time a customer swipes a credit card. Marshall and his Democratic co-sponsor, Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), have argued Visa and Mastercard have a duopoly over the credit card market, leading to higher swipe fees.
Their proposal would require large financial institutions to provide an option other than Visa or Mastercard to process credit card transactions.
The legislation has been the subject of fierce lobbying. While retailers have embraced the bill, the credit card industry has aggressively opposed the measure, arguing it would enrich major retailers and force credit card companies to do away with popular rewards programs.
'The Credit Card Competition Act has been controversial for a while in D.C.,' said Christopher Niebuhr, a senior research analyst at Beacon Policy Advisors.
'The inclusion of the Credit Card Competition Act as an amendment, were it to get an amendment vote, would certainly add a little bit of risk or uncertainty as to the path forward for the GENIUS Act,' he added.
Lummis suggested Tuesday part of the push to include other measures in the stablecoin bill stems from a lack of movement on legislation in the Senate Banking Committee over the years.
'This is the first bill that's been reported out of the Banking Committee in eight years,' she said. 'So, there was a lot of pent-up desire to append other legislation that was financial services related to this bill. Some of that legislation is kind of controversial, so I get it.'
'I get why people are frustrated that they haven't had an opportunity to have their financial service related legislation heard,' she continued. 'But there will be other legislation that will come out of the Banking Committee, so they'll have other chances.'
While some GOP senators may be breathing a sigh of relief, the decision to move forward on the GENIUS Act without an open amendment process is raising questions for some Democrats, including those who initially supported the bill with the hopes of making changes down the line.
'I was glad about some of the bipartisan progress that had been made,' Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) told The Hill. 'It was one of the reasons I voted the bill out of committee in the first place, was with the agreement that there would be amendments.'
Blunt Rochester was one of five Democrats who joined their Republican colleague to vote the legislation out of the Senate Banking Committee in March. She and 15 other Democrats also supported the GENIUS Act in a procedural vote on the Senate floor last month.
However, she noted at the time that she wanted to see further changes to protect consumers and the stability of the financial system, as well as to prevent fraud and address President Trump's growing ties to the crypto industry.
'I was really clear,' Blunt Rochester added Tuesday. 'I hoped that there would be an open amendment process, and that's what I heard Leader Thune say around last month, so I will take a look at this language, and we'll make a decision from there.'
Thune repeatedly emphasized last month that he planned to move the GENIUS Act through the Senate via 'regular order,' allowing for an open amendment process on the floor.
This was central to his criticism of Democrats, who initially blocked the legislation from moving forward on the Senate floor in early May.
When Thune first sought to expedite the stablecoin bill, a contingent of crypto-friendly Democrats pulled their support, alleging Republicans had prematurely cut off negotiations and ultimately voting down a motion to advance the bill.
The Senate majority leader slammed Democrats at the time, arguing they would have a chance to make changes on the floor.
'All they had to do was vote for cloture. Not every bill that comes to the floor is a final bill. Now, that might be how it worked when they were in control, but Republicans are doing it differently,' Thune said in early May.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a fierce crypto critic who has opposed the bill, warned Tuesday that limiting amendments could undermine support for the legislation.
'Sen. Thune has repeatedly promised that he would open up the legislative process for amendments, and this is his first chance to do that, and he's gone back on his promise,' Warren told The Hill.
'It is possible that there will be people who will say that they voted to advance the bill, but without amendments, they can't do that anymore,' she added.
However, lead Democratic negotiators on the GENIUS Act have underscored the wins they secured through discussions Republicans.
'I think we have worked hard to incorporate many of the concerns that we have heard from our colleagues,' Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) told The Hill on Tuesday, adding, 'We had many, many amendments along the way that have been incorporated. Always we would like to have more, but it was a really solidly bipartisan effort.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Michael Goodwin: Hochul's snubbing of Mamdani will only help boost Cuomo's campaign
The observation that politics often makes for strange bedfellows is now offering an extra-strange New York example. It features an unlikely gift from Gov. Hochul to her predecessor and perpetual tormentor, Andrew Cuomo. Although she was his running mate and Lt. Governor for two terms, they were barely speaking by the time Cuomo was forced out of Albany nearly four years ago. Advertisement To this day, their mutual loathing is palpable. So how then to explain that Hochul threw Cuomo a huge last-minute lifeline in his race for mayor? To be sure, an obvious reason is to help herself in her re-election quest next year. But the immediate impact is a boost for Cuomo in his bid for City Hall. Advertisement You would assume the last thing she wants is to see him sitting in City Hall next year, badgering her and settling scores when she's running for re-election. Yet that could be the result of her move. Here's the scenario: Cuomo is in a tightening race to be the Democrats' nominee, with Election Day this Tuesday. 'Affordability crisis' He leads in the polls but his chief rival, Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, has been gaining and the early-voting turnout has surged among young people, the core of Mamdani's hard-left base. Moreover, with the city using the ranked-choice voting system, Mamdani has an extra advantage and could ultimately get the votes of four additional lefty candidates in the race through a series of cross endorsements. Advertisement Hochul's shocking help to Cuomo came in response to a question about Mamdani's radical economic platform, which consists of a bunch of free giveaways —buses, child care, etc. All of it would be funded by imposing even higher income taxes on the top 1 percent of New York City residents and hiking the corporate tax. It's part of the progressive playbook he's been selling for months, and his climb in the polls has encouraged other candidates to promote their own expensive wish lists and tax proposals. Advertisement Hochul has been silent all along, but suddenly, and very late in the game, she decided to throw cold water on the proposals that are the heart of Mamdani's eat-the-rich campaign. Asked in a TV interview if she backed his tax plans, the Democratic governor flatly replied, 'No.' 'I'm not raising taxes at a time where affordability is the big issue,' she said. 'I don't want to lose any more people to Palm Beach. We've lost enough . . . so let's be smart about this.' Whoa, Nellie. Hochul's answer was clearly prepared in advance, with her adopting Mamdani's theme of an 'affordability crisis' and turning it on its head to use it as a reason not to implement his agenda. In doing so, she effectively kills his proposals because he would need her and the Democratic-controlled Legislature's approval to put his taxes into law. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters And given the timing, her answer could be intended to blunt his late surge by signaling to his supporters his ideas are dead on arrival in Albany. Advertisement Her answer also reveals the outline of Hochul's 2026 campaign. She's effectively taken tax hikes off the table, and if she were to flip-flop next year, she'd be toast. So her answer on Mamdani is as much about her own campaign as his. Dems 'alarmed' Besides, as troubling as Cuomo would be in City Hall, even worse would be the charismatic 33-year-old Mamdani, pushing her and the Legislature even further left. There's also the added baggage of his long trail of antisemitism at a time when Israel is fighting for its survival on several fronts and Dems already are home to Jew-hating Reps Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. Having Mamdani, a Muslim, as the mayor of the city with the world's largest Jewish population has some top Dems worried that his election would further damage the party's troubled brand. Advertisement Politico reports that Third Way, a center-left Dem think tank, is 'alarmed' by how Mamdani's positions on Israel and other issues, past and present, would be a feast for Republicans in New York and nationally. The outlet cites a Third Way memo that describes 'defunding the police, closing jails, banning private healthcare and operating city-owned grocery stores as positions American voters would find beyond the pale.' They got that right. Advertisement At the same time, it's worth noting that Hochul's rejection of new taxes also amounts to a reversal of her tenure so far. Although she's lately been prattling about 'putting money in people's pockets,' the happy talk follows years of hikes in fees and taxes on New Yorkers to feed the budget beast she's created. As the cost of living in New York continues to soar, she's responsible for policies that have been driving a record number of New Yorkers out of the city and state, including to Palm Beach, Fla. Recall that during her tight race against GOP nominee Lee Zeldin in 2022, Hochul at one point demanded that he and other Republicans 'Just jump on a bus and head down to Florida where you belong, OK?,' before adding: 'You are not New Yorkers.' Advertisement The fact that the GOP is toothless in both Albany and City Hall has allowed her party to continually jack up the outrageously high costs of government and be tougher on cops than on criminals. Hochul's role in the disaster are certain to be the centerpiece of the GOP campaign against her next year, especially with New York moving rightward. In the 2024 election, the Empire State had the biggest swing of any blue state toward President Trump, who carried 43 percent of the vote, against just 37 percent in 2020. Vulnerable Hochul has made herself vulnerable with her implementation of congestion pricing, along with other taxes that are examples of her own drunken-sailor budgeting. The fact that several tax measures were designed to fund the always-broke MTA is no excuse because she controls the agency and has done zero to reform its wasteful ways. Her only answer has been to throw more money at it. Still, her response to Mamdani suggests she belatedly realizes there is validity and votes in the argument that the city and state have reached a tax-and-spend breaking point. As I noted recently, just 6,000 wealthy families in a city of 8.5 million people pay 48 percent of Gotham's personal income tax, which raises about $16 billion a year. These families are the geese who lay the golden eggs for both City Hall and Albany, and with the quality of life declining as the cost of living soars, the last thing the politicians should be doing is giving people new reasons to leave. In Hochul's case, it's relatively easy for her to say no to Mamdani, whose plans definitely would make the problems worse. The real test is whether she has any ideas that could stop the exodus already happening on her watch.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Fetterman offers support for Trump decision to bomb Iran
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is offering support for President Trump's decision to bomb Iran, standing out from a number of other Democrats who have criticized the military action. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' Fetterman wrote in a post on X that linked to a statement from Trump announcing the decision. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities,' Fetterman continued. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.' Fetterman since Hamas launched an attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 has been a vocal supporter of Israel, and has at times criticized his own party over the Middle East. His remarks in the immediate aftermath of the bombing campaign, as a result, are unsurprising. But they stood apart from other Democrats who criticized Trump's decision as unconstitutional. For example, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) criticized Trump for vowing to bring peace to the Middle East but failing, saying he had 'misled the country about his intensions.' 'The risk of war has now dramatically increased, and I pray for the safety of our troops in the region who have been put in harm's way,' Jeffries wrote in a statement. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) both criticized the strikes as unconstitutional. Fetterman, however, tied himself to Trump by retweeting the president's Truth Social message announcing the attacks on the three nuclear sites in Iran. 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan,' Trump posted on Truth Social.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Republicans line up behind Trump after strike on Iran — with few detractors
Republicans on Capitol Hill quickly lined up behind President Trump after he announced that the U.S. conducted a strike on three Iranian nuclear facilities, a strong show of support for the White House with few detractors inside the GOP. Trump announced on Truth Social just before 8 p.m. EDT on Saturday that the U.S. 'completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran,' including Fordow, the nuclear site hidden in a mountain south of Tehran. He is scheduled to address the nation from the White House at 10 p.m. Republican leaders in the House and Senate backed the action, which had become a debate of sorts in Washington — especially among GOP — since Israel struck Iranian nuclear facilities earlier this month in what it called a 'pre-emptive' attack. 'The military operations in Iran should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote in a statement on X. 'The President gave Iran's leader every opportunity to make a deal, but Iran refused to commit to a nuclear disarmament agreement. President Trump has been consistent and clear that a nuclear-armed Iran will not be tolerated. That posture has now been enforced with strength, precision, and clarity.' 'The President's decisive action prevents the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, which chants 'Death to America,' from obtaining the most lethal weapon on the planet,' he added. 'This is America First policy in action. God bless our brave men and women in uniform – the most lethal fighting force on the planet – as we pray for their safe return home. May God bless America.' Johnson was briefed on the strike beforehand, a source familiar with the matter told The Hill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wrote in a statement with X: 'I stand with President Trump.' 'The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing 'death to America' and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace. The mullahs' misguided pursuit of nuclear weapons must be stopped,' he said. 'As we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), similarly, backed Trump after the strike and applauded him for making the 'right call.' 'Iran has waged a war of terror against the United States for 46 years. We could never allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. God bless our brave troops. President Trump made the right call and the ayatollahs should recall his warning not to target Americans,' Cotton wrote on X. 'As I have said multiple times recently, I regret that Iran has brought the world to this point,' Crawford echoed in a statement. 'That said, I am thankful President Trump understood that the red line — articulated by President of both parties for decades — was real. The United States and our allies, including Israel, are making it clear that the world would never accept Iran's development of a nuclear weapon.' While the majority of Republicans backed Trump in the wake of the strike, there were some GOP detractors on Capitol Hill. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who has been advocating for the U.S. to avoid intervention in the Israel-Iran conflict, wrote on X minutes after Trump announced the offensive: 'This is not Constitutional.' Massie helped lead a bipartisan war powers resolution to prohibit U.S. involvement in the Middle East dispute. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) suggested that the move was unconstitutional. 'While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional. I look forward to his remarks tonight,' he wrote on X. Trump's decision to strike a trio of Iranian nuclear sites came after a week of debate on Capitol Hill over whether the U.S. should take action in Iran after Israel launched an attack on Iran, prompting a back-and-forth between the two countries. Trump on Thursday said he would decide whether to take action within the next two weeks. 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiation that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go in the next two weeks,' Trump said in the statement read by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. The big question had been whether the U.S. would deploy a large bomb known as a 'bunker buster' to strike the Fordow facility, which is underground. While some lawmakers advocated for the move, others — including some of the president's most vocal supporters on the right-flank — pushed against the U.S. directly getting involved in the conflict. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), for example, said 'Me and my district support President Trump and his MAGA agenda, it's what we voted for in November, and foreign wars weren't a part of it.' On Saturday night, she offered prayers for the safety of U.S. troops and Americans in the Middle East. 'Let us pray that we are not attacked by terrorists on our homeland after our border was open for the past 4 years and over 2 Million gotaways came in.🙏 Let us pray for peace. 🙏,' she added. But across the GOP conferences on Capitol Hill, Republicans were quick to back the move by the president. 'Our commander-in-chief has made a deliberate —and correct— decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime,' Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) wrote in a statement on X. 'We now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies and stability for the middle-east. Well-done to our military personnel. You're the best!' House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), the No. 3 House Republican, said Trump 'was right then, and he is right today: NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE.' 'A nuclear Iran posed a threat to the Middle East and to the world. @POTUS has been consistent that this dangerous regime should NEVER possess a nuclear weapon,' he added in a statement on X.
