This is a major event in the crypto world today. Senate Republicans have released new text for the Clarity Act, a final proposal put forward ahead of Tuesday's key cloture vote. Compared to last Thursday's text, four main areas were changed, significantly altering the probability of passage this year: Primarily on ethics: 1. State attorneys general may enforce three prohibitions: issuing/endorsing digital assets, holding "significant" financial interests, and exchanges listing non-compliant assets. 2. Relevant individuals must divest or enter into a qualified blind trust (modeled on the 1978 Ethics in Government Act). 3. Civil penalties: 20% of the transaction consideration, or $500,000 (inflation-adjusted), whichever is higher. 4. Effective date: 360 days after the bill's passage, or 60 days after the implementation rules under Section 10102 are issued, whichever is earlier. What Republicans mean by "Trump signed off on about 80% of Tillis–Gallego" refers to these changes. State attorney general enforcement is a core provision Democrats have long demanded, and this time it has been written in. However, what remains unresolved: how "significant" is defined, whether family trusts/indirect holdings count, and whether the 2029 sunset is still in place. These three areas give Gallego / Alsobrooks enough room to stall for another day. In addition, On stablecoin yield: If the Treasury determines that community banks have experienced "material" deposit outflows, it may restrict payment stablecoin rewards; the authorization would only last 18 months. This is a nod to community banks and some Republicans, not a permanent ban on yield. On BRCA / developers: Developers remain exempt from being treated as money transmitters/financial institutions; protections are extended to miners and validators; the reference to 18 U.S.C. 1960 has been removed. The direction is a civil safe harbor, not blanket criminal immunity. On the Agriculture Committee portion: Strengthens related-party transactions and conflicts of interest for digital commodity exchanges/brokers; clarifies that state consumer protection laws apply; developer protections do not touch derivatives law or tribal gaming. To summarize briefly: This has indeed opened up negotiating room for Tuesday's cloture vote, with clear substantive concessions compared to Thursday's version. However, the key Democratic votes are not necessarily secured, and Tuesday's vote is only "opening the door," with the subsequent calendar still tight. Next, the key is to watch three people tomorrow: Gallego, Alsobrooks, and Tillis. Only if they say yes does cloture go from "possible" to "tradable."