BITWU
Feed
Feed
What are the key points to watch for in the Fed's rate decision tonight?
This FOMC rate decision will be announced at 2:00 AM Beijing time on September 17, with a press conference at 2:30 AM.
The market is currently highly expecting a 25bp rate hike;
This is almost a done deal!
I think if it's just a single rate hike without plans for consecutive hikes, it might actually be positive. But if it's +25bp and the dot plot continues to be revised upward, with hikes continuing in December and even into 2027, that would be quite challenging!
The key is that Warsh, that old fellow, always uses very vague wording,
which makes it really difficult for us!
⏰ Crypto bill not passed yet:
The key procedural vote on the "Cryptocurrency Market Structure Act" (the "CLARITY Act") early this morning
ended with 50 votes in favor and 50 against, failing to reach the 60-vote threshold needed for passage;
meaning this time the "CLARITY Act" vote did not pass and cannot enter the Senate's formal review process in the short term.
This vote result does not mean the bill is permanently dead, nor that it has been finally rejected; it only means the procedural debate on "whether to enter review" failed this time,
so the bill cannot proceed to subsequent amendment discussions for now. The bill still has a basis of principled support, but the current version failed to form a broad enough bipartisan coalition.
One of the main drafters of the "CLARITY Act," Cynthia Lummis @SenLummis, along with several politicians including @SenTedCruz, stated the main reason lies with the Democrats, who have never seriously taken consumer protection and maintaining U.S. leadership seriously.
They accused them of "bringing politics into it" and warned this could push the crypto industry and related jobs overseas.
BITWU
The "CLARITY Act" is still progressing,
The Senate cloture procedural vote, which requires 60 votes to proceed, will take place tomorrow.
The Republican side claims that this version has already incorporated 126 substantive amendments proposed by the Democrats.
From what I remember, the U.S. initially had very strict policies on cryptocurrency, with a period of suppression when Yellen was still around, and she criticized Bitcoin every time she appeared.
Then things started to reverse with Musk and Dogecoin; the U.S. went from massive stimulus during the pandemic to moving from an ambiguous phase directly to openly supporting and globally endorsing crypto.
If we divide U.S. crypto policy into three stages, I think it can be viewed like this:
2017–2021:
Crypto went from resistance to ambiguity.
2021–2025:
From ambiguity to open support and full development.
2025–2026:
Crypto becomes a new industry that needs regulation.
After CLARITY:
Crypto begins to become part of the U.S. financial infrastructure.
So even if this time CLARITY doesn’t get 60 votes due to political reasons, I think the overall direction of U.S. crypto policy is already very clear.
First, this thing has become a basic national policy. It’s not something anyone can change. The U.S. needs cryptocurrency; it’s not cryptocurrency that needs the U.S. I’ve said this logic many times before.
Second, the White House has clearly stated that if Congress fails, the SEC and CFTC will still continue to use existing rulemaking authority to advance the regulatory framework.
What both sides are now debating are the guardrails, not whether crypto should exist. The existence and development of crypto is an undisputed fact.
I think about the topic of choice, especially the choice of life:
Don't procrastinate; do it as soon as you think of it. When you encounter something interesting or a moment that excites you, you should immediately try it, perceive it, and broaden your exposure.
If a person always procrastinates, giving themselves various reasons to delay, and it eventually becomes habitual procrastination, then procrastination will quietly change the problem itself and your own habits:
Trying means having the right to choose; the right to choose means a larger area of luck; a larger area of luck means a greater possibility of success.
Once procrastination becomes a habit, the right to choose becomes very limited and eventually suddenly disappears.
It is more like a door slowly closing. After you procrastinate for a long time, this door will get smaller and smaller, and eventually, the crack in the door may only let in a little light. At that time, your world will be dim.
Why are they arguing again?
No time to watch the drama,
Can the all-powerful @grok help me summarize,
What are the key KOLs and project teams in the crypto space arguing about today? I see a lot of people involved, regarding the issue of listing failure and no refunds in the end. Please give me a full panorama of the drama!
CoinEx also fell? Is this exchange Yang Haibo's?
Foresight News
🥲 Another exchange has fallen! CoinEx will gradually cease operations, with the withdrawal window open until December 22
The crypto trading platform @coinexcom announced that due to prolonged market downturn, shrinking trading volume and liquidity, and rising compliance costs, it has decided to gradually wind down operations.
Starting September 15, new user registrations will be stopped; on September 22, non-spot business will be suspended; from 10:00 on September 29, spot trading will be suspended and non-USDT assets will be processed.
The withdrawal deadline is 10:00 on December 22, 2026. USDT not withdrawn by then will be transferred to independent custody, with a custody fee of 5% per month charged on the balance at the end of the withdrawal period; the custody claim deadline is August 22, 2028.
Additionally, CoinEx Smart Chain and OneSwap will be shut down simultaneously.
The "CLARITY Act" is still progressing,
The Senate cloture procedural vote, which requires 60 votes to proceed, will take place tomorrow.
The Republican side claims that this version has already incorporated 126 substantive amendments proposed by the Democrats.
From what I remember, the U.S. initially had very strict policies on cryptocurrency, with a period of suppression when Yellen was still around, and she criticized Bitcoin every time she appeared.
Then things started to reverse with Musk and Dogecoin; the U.S. went from massive stimulus during the pandemic to moving from an ambiguous phase directly to openly supporting and globally endorsing crypto.
If we divide U.S. crypto policy into three stages, I think it can be viewed like this:
2017–2021:
Crypto went from resistance to ambiguity.
2021–2025:
From ambiguity to open support and full development.
2025–2026:
Crypto becomes a new industry that needs regulation.
After CLARITY:
Crypto begins to become part of the U.S. financial infrastructure.
So even if this time CLARITY doesn’t get 60 votes due to political reasons, I think the overall direction of U.S. crypto policy is already very clear.
First, this thing has become a basic national policy. It’s not something anyone can change. The U.S. needs cryptocurrency; it’s not cryptocurrency that needs the U.S. I’ve said this logic many times before.
Second, the White House has clearly stated that if Congress fails, the SEC and CFTC will still continue to use existing rulemaking authority to advance the regulatory framework.
What both sides are now debating are the guardrails, not whether crypto should exist. The existence and development of crypto is an undisputed fact.
蓝狐
Seeing the news that Senate Democrats will hold a meeting tonight local time to discuss the Clarity Act counterproposal, interestingly, there are less than 24 hours until tomorrow's cloture vote.
This indicates two points:
First, the "80% ethics + 126 amendments" has not fully locked in votes and there are still uncertainties.
Gallego / Tillis can open the door for talks; however, Warner, Cortez Masto, Gillibrand, and the party leadership want their own checklist: enforcement strength, illegal financing, stablecoin yields, and developer protection scope.
One possible approach is: the night before, the counterproposal is thrown out → Republicans say "this is the final plan" and reject it → a group of Democrats vote no citing "the text is still insufficient."
If it reaches 60 votes, that's fine, but if it falls short by one or two votes, that would be unfortunate.
Second, the door is not completely closed yet, but it depends on the Democrats' intentions.
There are two uses for proposing a counterproposal the night before:
One is genuinely wanting to negotiate, using the counterproposal to exchange for "first voting cloture, then amending after entering."
The other is using the counterproposal to veto, declaring "if the counterproposal is not included in the text, we will not vote."
If it's the second case, getting 60 votes tomorrow will not be easy.
