Two amendments that were not debated: One that Senator Elizabeth Warren described as being supported by law enforcement, and another that would have further changed how yield rewards could be treated to align more closely with what the banking industry has asked for.

All eyes now turn to the work that Senate Banking Committee and Senate Agriculture Committee members will do to merge the two different drafts of the bill.

Cody Carbone, the head of the Digital Chamber, one of the crypto trade groups, told reporters after the vote Thursday that negotiations are also continuing on the Senate Agriculture Committee side of things.

"I imagine the next three weeks on both committees are going to be insanity, and some of the Ag compromises will start to be made," he said.

This is also where any ethics provision banning senior government officials from profiting off business ties to the crypto industry may be inserted. Senators suggested during the hearing that they were close to some form of agreement on this, but there's no details yet. And of course, the White House will need to sign off on the agreement.

Assuming the Senate gets to a place where at least 60 members vote for the thing, we'll have to see what happens in the House of Representatives. The fact that this bill will have to have bipartisan support in the House and that the House voted for previous version of this bill last year suggests that this bill may make it through with little issue.

But it is the House of Representatives. It's possible lawmakers will try to attach a central bank digital currency ban, as they've tried to attach to every bill that's gone through the House in recent months (including but not limited to housing legislation, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and others). But that's a ways off.

And of course, there's also the elephant in the room: The sheer amount the crypto industry spent in 2024 and how much it's planning to spend in 2026 to try and shape the elections. Industry participants and proponents will argue that the hundreds of millions of dollars being poured into political action committees like Fairshake are a necessary response to what they see as the regulatory overreach under the prior administration. And sure, it is one response. But it loomed over the hearing on Thursday, with the Coinbase-backed Stand With Crypto organization telling lawmakers it would "grade" them based on how they voted and the expenditures we've already seen from Fairshake, Fellowship and other PACs.

Punchbowl News published an interesting analysis of this aspect of the hearing on Friday, which is worth a read. The industry's next steps and endorsements will be worth watching on this front.

This week

This week

• No official hearings or meetings are planned as of press time.

If you’ve got thoughts or questions on what I should discuss next week or any other feedback you’d like to share, feel free to email me at nik@coindesk.com or find me on Bluesky @nikhileshde.bsky.social.

You can also join the group conversation on Telegram.

See ya’ll next week!