Key Insights
- Scaramucci defended Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, saying he was among the strongest advocates for the CLARITY Act.
- The crypto bill stalled again in the Senate amid disputes over ethics provisions, stablecoin yield rules and the 60-vote threshold.
- Armstrong rejected reports blaming him and Coinbase for the setback, accusing the WSJ of unfairly portraying their role.
The CLARITY act failed a key Senate procedural vote on September 15, 2026, and the aftermath quickly turned into a public dispute over responsibility.
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong pushed back against reporting that said he would blame him personally, while Anthony Scaramucci defended the executive’s efforts.
Senators voted 49-50 against advancing H.R. 3633, falling short of the 60 votes required. The legislation aimed to create a federal framework for digital asset markets and clarify responsibilities between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
CLARITY Act Blame and Armstrong’s Response
Armstrong stated that The Wall Street Journal was preparing a story linking him and Coinbase to the bill’s failure.
He rejected that narrative. In January, he had opposed an earlier draft over four specific issues: decentralized finance rules, tokenization provisions, the scope of CFTC authority, and stablecoin rewards.
Armstrong said those concerns were later addressed through negotiations. He then supported the revised Senate draft.
“I’m proud to have done it, and would do it again, because it helped create a better bill,” he wrote.
He accused the Journal of repeating bank lobby talking points rather than reflecting his long-standing advocacy for federal crypto legislation.
Stablecoin rewards formed one of the sharper points of contention. Coinbase sought to enable platforms to offer yield on idle stablecoin balances.
Banks viewed those products as too close to regulated banking services. The disagreement carried into the broader negotiations around the CLARITY Act.
Scaramucci Defends Coinbase CEO
Anthony Scaramucci entered the discussion on September 20. “No one worked harder to advance the Clarity Act than @brian_armstrong,” he posted.
Scaramucci described the outcome as “typical Washington nonsense” driven by partisan rancor. He said a compromise bill that “helped all Americans” had been blocked and that the resulting blame game was “total nonsense.”
The defense placed Armstrong’s record of advocacy against the political dynamics that ultimately stopped the measure.
Armstrong had spent years engaging with lawmakers and supporting industry political efforts. The final Senate version reflected changes on the issues he had flagged months earlier.
After the vote, Armstrong indicated the legislation was likely dead for now. He pointed to the SEC and CFTC as alternative routes for establishing clearer rules.
Seven Democratic senators said bipartisan talks would continue, though the immediate path through Congress had closed.
The CLARITY Act’s failure leaves the industry reliant on existing agency authority. Armstrong’s public rejection of the blame narrative and Scaramucci’s defense of his role have framed the post-vote discussion around process and responsibility rather than the bill’s original policy goals.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial or investment advice.
