straight talk
The GENIUS Act and STABLE Act: A breakdown
Urgent Senate Vote Accelerated for Pioneering Digital Asset Legislation
Senator John Thune has been pushing for a quick vote on the GENIUS Act, a bill designed to regulate stablecoins tied to the US dollar. The bill, sponsored by Senator Bill Hagerty, has been gaining traction, with support from Senators Tim Scott and Cynthia Lummis.
The GENIUS Act aims to set up a regulatory framework that ensures US dollar dominance in the global finance market. However, it's not all good news. The bill has faces stern opposition from traditional banking advocates, who believe it could undermine the traditional banking system by allowing non-bank stablecoin issuers to compete with FDIC-insured banks.
Meanwhile, the STABLE Act, which originated in the House, is also making headway but details about its current status aren't as clear as the GENIUS Act's.
Here's where things get interesting. The Senate's GENIUS Act and the House's STABLE Act have differences in key areas. For instance, the Senate bill lets money market funds be used as reserves, while the House version is more restrictive. Both bills offer a $10 billion threshold, but with different approaches. They also differ on algorithmic stablecoins, with the STABLE Act imposing a two-year moratorium and the GENIUS Act requiring a brief study.
Despite these differences, both bills reflect a growing consensus in Congress that stablecoins need clear, enforceable regulatory frameworks. But, they're facing challenges, including concerns about potential corruption and conflicts of interest.
In short, the GENIUS Act is a more detailed and comprehensive proposal, focusing on operational standards, transparency, financial safeguards, and clear regulatory roles. It also has provisions to protect stablecoin investors in bankruptcy situations. However, it's facing political and procedural hurdles, and critics have raised concerns about potential loopholes for corruption.
On the other hand, the STABLE Act shares some common goals but appears less exhaustive in operational and regulatory detail compared to the GENIUS Act.
So, as things stand, the success of these bills depends on overcoming legislative opposition and addressing concerns about potential corruption and loopholes.
Now, you might be wondering why the hell Coinbase, the biggest crypto firm in the US, is trying to screw these bills over. Well, according to recent reports, Coinbase is allegedly trying to prevent both the GENIUS Act AND the STABLE Act from reaching floor votes. A tech venture capital firm, Andreessen Horowitz, has been helping Coinbase in its efforts to delay votes on stablecoin legislation.
Sources close to the matter claim that Andreessen Horowitz has been sympathetic to delaying votes on stablecoin legislation, and they're not alone. Other big players in the industry are also watching these bills closely, just waiting for the right moment to make their moves.
As always, keep an eye on the ever-evolving world of crypto. Who knows what next week will bring?
[Sebastian Sinclair]
Y'all want more?
Here are some extra tidbits for those who like their facts served with a side of sass:
- The GENIUS Act reached the Senate floor for debate in early May 2025, but a key procedural vote aimed at moving the crypto legislation forward failed, signaling bipartisan challenges despite the need for regulation.
- The STABLE Act, while advancing in Congress, lacks clear information about its current procedural status compared to the GENIUS Act.
- Both bills aim to create regulatory frameworks for stablecoin issuers but have significant differences in scope, detail, and regulatory approach.
- The Senate bill allows money market funds to be used as reserves, while the House version is more restrictive.
- Both provide a $10 billion threshold, but with different approaches. They also differ on algorithmic stablecoins: STABLE imposes a two-year moratorium, while GENIUS only requires a brief study.
- Critics argue that the GENIUS Act lacks measures preventing corruption and conflicts of interest involving elected officials. No specific criticisms have been noted for the STABLE Act relative to corruption or conflicts of interest.
- The GENIUS Act represents a more detailed and comprehensive proposal, focusing on rigorous operational standards, transparency, financial safeguards, and clear federal-state regulatory roles. It also has provisions to protect stablecoin investors in bankruptcy situations. However, it's facing opposition and concerns about potential loopholes for corruption.
- The STABLE Act shares some common goals but appears less exhaustive in operational and regulatory detail compared to the GENIUS Act.
- The GENIUS Act, a bill designed to regulate stablecoins, is facing opposition from traditional banking advocates who believe it could undermine the traditional banking system by allowing non-bank stablecoin issuers to compete with FDIC-insured banks.
- Despite facing opposition, the GENIUS Act aims to set up a regulatory framework that ensures US dollar dominance in the global finance market and includes provisions to protect stablecoin investors in bankruptcy situations.
- Coinbase, the biggest crypto firm in the US, is allegedly trying to prevent both the GENIUS Act and the STABLE Act from reaching floor votes, according to recent reports, with assistance from tech venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.
- The crypto market continues to be influenced by policy-and-legislation, as evidenced by the ongoing debate over the GENIUS Act and the STABLE Act in Congress, with both bills aiming to create regulatory frameworks for stablecoin issuers but having significant differences in scope, detail, and regulatory approach.
- Critics argue that the GENIUS Act lacks measures preventing corruption and conflicts of interest involving elected officials, raising concerns about potential loopholes for corruption in the legislation.
