Bill Hagerty revives July 4 hope for CLARITY Act passage

Senator Bill Hagerty has renewed expectations that Congress could advance the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act before the July 4 recess, even as several lawmakers continue to caution that final Senate action may take longer.

According to comments made by Hagerty during a FOX Business interview, negotiations on the legislation remain ongoing, but he still hopes lawmakers can complete work on the bill before Congress breaks for Independence Day.

“This will be something more a matter of focus after the 4th of July recess period, but I certainly hope to see it done before,” Hagerty said.

The Tennessee Republican described the legislation as a key step toward establishing clear rules for digital assets in the United States. In his view, the bill would provide the certainty needed for businesses and investors to participate in the sector under a defined regulatory framework.

His remarks come as the Senate recently approved the GENIUS Act, which created a federal framework for stablecoins. Hagerty argued that the stablecoin legislation demonstrated how regulatory clarity can support dollar-backed digital assets while strengthening the role of the U.S. dollar through fully reserved stablecoins.

Senate debate has narrowed to ethics provisions

While Hagerty continues to push for action before July 4, other lawmakers have offered a more cautious timeline. Senator Cynthia Lummis has indicated that a Senate floor vote is more likely before the August recess than before Independence Day.

Additional insight from Washington discussions suggests that most policy disagreements may already be settled. As reported earlier by crypto.news, David Nage, managing director and portfolio manager at Arca, said conversations with Senate offices left him believing lawmakers and industry participants are roughly 80% to 85% aligned on the substance of the legislation.

According to Nage, stablecoin yield provisions no longer appear to be a major source of disagreement despite continued criticism from banking executives, including JPMorgan Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon.

Instead, Nage said discussions have increasingly focused on conflict-of-interest and ethics rules that would restrict government officials from participating in crypto-related business activities while holding office.

Following meetings with congressional staff, Nage stated that lawmakers are now debating how such restrictions should be enforced rather than whether they should exist. He characterized the remaining disagreement as a political and implementation issue rather than a dispute over digital asset market structure.

Under Nage’s base-case scenario, lawmakers would resolve the ethics provisions and reconcile competing proposals in the coming weeks, allowing the legislation to reach the Senate floor after Congress returns from recess on July 13.

Industry sees regulation as key to institutional participation

Supporters of the legislation argue that regulatory certainty remains one of the largest barriers preventing broader participation from traditional financial institutions.

Speaking on the issue, Solana Policy Institute President Kristin Smith said many asset allocators continue to explore opportunities in digital assets but are waiting for clearer regulatory guidelines before committing capital.

Smith also rejected claims that the CLARITY Act would weaken oversight of the industry. According to her, the legislation would introduce additional consumer protections, provide law enforcement with new tools, and address gaps in existing regulations.

Backers of the measure further note that the bill would clarify the responsibilities of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission while establishing compliance requirements for digital asset firms.

At the same time, Lummis has disclosed that the legislation includes $150 million in funding intended to combat illicit activity involving cryptocurrencies. She has also warned that if Congress fails to advance the measure during the current legislative window, meaningful action on market structure legislation could potentially be delayed until 2030.