WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans released a revised cryptocurrency regulatory framework bill on Wednesday with an added section intended to address public officials’ potential crypto conflicts of interest. But more work remains to be done before the measure can get to the floor.

Democratic negotiators, incensed at President Donald Trump’s wealth being turbocharged by income from his family’s crypto ventures, continued to hold back their support, at least without further tweaks.

Senate Banking Digital Assets Subcommittee Chair Cynthia Lummis released the updated text for that chamber’s substitute amendment to a House-passed bill that would set a regulatory “market structure” for the operations and oversight of digital asset markets.

“This is another step in my years’ long journey to ensure the U.S. leads the way on digital assets,” the retiring Lummis, R-Wyo., said in a statement. “I also want to thank my Democratic colleagues for their important contributions to this draft, and express my commitment to reaching a deal in the coming days that will allow this legislation to become law.”

The measure combines a previous version approved by the Senate Banking Committee at a May markup and a separate amendment that the Senate Agriculture Committee, which shares jurisdiction, approved in January. Supporters are pushing to get a Senate floor vote before the summer recess begins on Aug. 7.

A significant addition to the legislation is an ethics section that would prohibit any public official or employee and their spouse from issuing or sponsoring a digital asset. The president, vice president, members of Congress and federal judges are among those covered, according to a fact sheet released by Lummis.

The ban would be enforced by the U.S. attorney general, who could take enforcement actions against public officials and crypto exchanges for violations. The ban would sunset on Jan. 20, 2029, which is inauguration day for the next president.

The sunset date is significant because “this is a standard President Trump chose to hold himself to, not one Congress imposed on him,” according to the fact sheet.

Democrats have been pushing for an ethics provision because of what they call Trump’s egregious crypto conflicts. The two Banking Committee Democrats who voted in favor of the bill during the May markup, Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland and Ruben Gallego of Arizona, said they would not support the bill on the Senate floor without strong ethics guardrails.

Alsobrooks wasn’t satisfied with the revised bill. She said state attorneys general also should be able to enforce the ethics rules.

“We’ve got to keep working,” she told reporters.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., raised strong concerns about ethics during the Agriculture Committee markup. He dismissed the revised crypto bill.

“There’s all these (Democratic) priorities that are not reflected in that text, and we’re not going to support it,” Booker told reporters. “So, we have to find a bipartisan pathway, or this is going to die.”

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., acknowledged Republicans and Democrats remain divided.

“If we bridge the gap on ethics tonight, tomorrow, then I think we’ve got a shot,” Tillis, a member of the Banking Committee, told reporters.

If all Republicans vote for the bill, at least seven Democrats also would have to support it to overcome a filibuster.

Clock ticking

But the legislative clock is ticking.

There’s a possibility the legislation could hit the Senate floor next week, although the following week might be more likely, according to a Senate Republican aide.

The Senate also is grappling with a continuing resolution, a potential Russia sanctions bill, Jay Clayton’s nomination to be the next director of national intelligence and other issues.

Ethics is not the only unresolved issue in the crypto bill. Democrats also have raised concerns about how it would affect the ability of law enforcement to crack down on illicit finance, money laundering and other malfeasance in digital markets.

The revised bill includes a stand-alone section on “law enforcement tools.” It would authorize $600 million annually from fiscal 2027 through fiscal 2031 for state and local digital asset enforcement; create grants for state and local enforcement against elder financial fraud; establish a digital asset law enforcement training program; and set up a task force on cryptocurrency scams.

But the revised bill continues to fall short for Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., who raised law enforcement concerns at the Banking Committee markup.

Cortez Masto said the original bill would hamper authorities’ ability to trace illicit finance and recover victims’ money. It also would make it harder to prosecute criminals for knowingly transmitting illicit funds. The revised version didn’t assuage her.

“Sen. Cortez Masto is still negotiating with her colleagues, but this updated text does not address her specific concerns that she’s been working to address for months,” spokesperson Lauren Wodarski said.

Seven Democrats generally considered to be pro-crypto later released a joint statement outlining their concerns, but they didn’t rule out a deal ultimately coming together.

“Key provisions including those addressing ethics for elected officials, consumer protection, illicit finance, conflicts of interest and market integrity must be strengthened,” read the statement from Alsobrooks, Booker, Gallego and Cortez Masto, as well as Sens. Mark Warner of Virginia and Raphael Warnock of Georgia. “We have been working in good faith with our Republican colleagues for the past year and will continue doing so to get this over the finish line.”

Stablecoin concerns

Like the original version, the updated bill would ban crypto exchanges from paying interest to stablecoins investors for holding the token, which is a digital asset pegged to the dollar. But the bill would allow crypto exchanges to offer rewards to stablecoins holders for activities, such as making payments with stablecoins.

The language is seen as a win for the crypto industry and a loss for the banking sector. Banking groups have warned that the yield provision could create a migration out of traditional bank deposits and into stablecoins, potentially destabilizing the financial system.

The banking sector is not happy with the revised bill, which “still puts at risk the local lending that drives economic activity in the U.S.,” six banking groups said in a statement.

They said they are working with “senators who share our concerns” on “targeted changes that would strengthen the prohibition on interest-like payments for holding stablecoins.”

The American Bankers Association, Consumer Bankers Association, Bank Policy Institute, Financial Services Forum, Independent Community Bankers of America and the National Bankers Association issued the statement.

_____

©2026 CQ-Roll Call, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Visit cqrollcall.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.