The Clarity Act failed in the Senate on September 15, without even reaching a procedural vote. It was one of the most anticipated pieces of legislation of the year: it promised a clear regulatory framework for crypto, separating what is a security and what is a commodity.

What happened: it didn’t get the 60 votes needed to move forward. Democrats, with few exceptions, closed ranks against it. Republicans pushed, but it wasn’t enough.

What it means: the US crypto market remains in regulatory limbo. Without a clear framework, businesses keep migrating jurisdictions, projects avoid launching tokens in the United States, and the SEC retains the power to regulate “through enforcement” (suing first, defining later).

But there’s a reaction: Fairshake, the crypto super PAC, announced $30M in spending for midterm elections, targeting specifically Senator Sherrod Brown, one of the architects of the blockade. The message: if the industry can’t get a legal framework, it will get a change of legislators.

The fall of the Clarity Act isn’t the end of the regulatory debate—it’s the start of an electoral war. And in a US election year, that weighs just as much as any technical chart.

Do you think the path for crypto in the US goes through Congress, or through changing who sits in Congress?

#ClarityActFacesProceduralVoteSept15