Digital Chamber CEO Cody Carbone said in a CoinDesk broadcast interview on September 11 that unresolved ethical provisions have become the main obstacle to winning the 60 votes needed for the Clarity Act to pass the U.S. Senate, with a vote expected in five days.

Carbone said the bill is still unfinished and cautioned against reading the current impasse as the end of the legislative effort. His comments framed the ethics debate as the practical condition for Senate passage, above other policy disagreements that remain in play.

He also said stablecoin yields are still a concern in the broader negotiations, but described ethics as the decisive issue for assembling enough support. According to Carbone, without a solution on that front, the measure cannot reach the 60-vote mark typically needed to move through the Senate.

Carbone added that the White House has offered little public commentary in the past five to six weeks, leaving uncertainty around whether it supports the ethics proposal put forward by Senators Tillis and Gallego. He said only the president and legal counsel know whether the administration views that proposal favorably.

The Clarity Act is part of a wider U.S. push to define rules for digital-asset market structure. Industry backers have argued that the legislation would provide a clearer federal framework for crypto platforms and related intermediaries, but the latest comments suggest the bill’s near-term path depends less on policy design than on late-stage political bargaining.

Why It Matters

This matters because the latest hurdle is procedural and political, not just technical. For crypto businesses watching Washington, the issue is whether a long-discussed market-structure bill can clear the coalition-building stage that often determines whether legislation advances at all.

The episode also shows that U.S. crypto regulation remains tied to broader governance debates inside Washington. Even when there is visible industry support for clearer rules, unresolved ethics language and White House positioning can still decide whether legislation moves forward.