Former Rep. Patrick McHenry Urges Passage of the Clarity Act for Crypto Market Structure

Former Rep. Patrick McHenry Urges Passage of the Clarity Act for Crypto Market Structure In an article originally published in Fortune, former Congressman Patrick McHenry argues that Congress must pass the Clarity Act to establish a proactive regulatory framework for digital assets, comparing its potential impact to the Telecommunications Act of 1996. McHenry compares the Clarity Act to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, calling it a forward-looking effort to embrace technological change and protect consumers. The proposed legislation breaks away from decades of crisis-driven financial policy to provide clear boundaries requested by businesses. The act aims to establish consumer and investor safeguards while providing law enforcement with tools to target bad actors. Bipartisan legislative momentum, including the passage of the stablecoin-focused GENIUS Act, indicates growing congressional support for digital asset regulation. A Shift from Reactive Financial Policy McHenry notes that major financial laws since the 2008 financial crisis, such as Dodd-Frank, were backward-looking reactions to past emergencies. In contrast, the Clarity Act offers an opportunity to establish comprehensive financial regulations without being triggered by a crisis, providing modern rules rather than relying on century-old securities statutes. Industry Need for Regulatory Guardrails Addressing views that the crypto sector desires deregulation or fits under existing laws, McHenry emphasizes that businesses are asking for clear boundaries to operate and build confidently. The Clarity Act is designed to protect consumers and investors, grant law enforcement tools to stop illicit actors, and eliminate fears of arbitrary regulatory crackdowns. Bipartisan Support and Global Competitiveness Highlighting the bipartisan passage of the stablecoin-regulating GENIUS Act as evidence of legislative momentum, McHenry contends that lawmakers increasingly recognize the permanence of digital assets. He cautions that without clear domestic rules, global capital and innovation will flow to foreign jurisdictions moving aggressively on crypto regulation.

前议员麦克亨利发文呼吁通过《清晰法案》重塑加密市场监管 前美国国会议员帕特里克·麦克亨利撰文指出，国会正在推进的《清晰法案》（Clarity Act）具备类似1996年《电信法》的划时代意义，将摆脱危机驱动的被动监管模式，为加密行业提供明确规则以确保美国在全球技术与金融领域的领先地位。 《清晰法案》被视作自1996年《电信法》以来最具前瞻性的立法尝试，获得跨党派广泛支持并涉及多个委员会的协同。 该法案打破了自2008年金融危机以来仅针对过往危机的被动监管模式，成为近三十年来首个非危机驱动的全面金融政策举措。 法案旨在确立规则边界，保护消费者和投资者，为执法部门打击犯罪提供工具，并消除创业者面临的随意执法隐忧。 监管稳定币的《天才法案》（GENIUS Act）此前已在国会两院获两党支持通过，显示出加密市场立法具备强大的跨党派共识。 打破被动监管历史模式 麦克亨利指出，自2008年金融危机以来，从《多德-弗兰克法案》到后续银行改革，美国金融政策大多是在应对过去的问题，导致监管框架仅适用于防范昨日风险而非把握明日机遇。《清晰法案》则提供了自近三十年前《格雷姆-里奇-比利雷法案》以来，首次制定不受危机驱动的全面金融政策框架的机会。 行业需求与规则保障 针对使用近百年前证券法已足够或行业不需要监管的观点，麦克亨利认为企业实际上迫切需要明确的运营规则。明确的边界能让创业者放心投资与创造就业，避免遭受无法解释的突击打击。法案将同时保护消费者和投资者，并向执法部门提供制止不法分子的必要工具。 全球竞争与两党立法共识 随着其他国家积极行动，全球资本和创新将流向规则明晰的地区。包括已在两院通过的稳定币监管立法《天才法案》在内，各类加密市场结构法案持续获得跨党派议员支持。麦克亨利强调，《清晰法案》不仅事关数字资产，更是美国在21世纪经济中保持主导地位的关键所在。

*This article, written by former Congressman [Patrick McHenry](https://x.com/PatrickMcHenry?lang=en), was originally published in* [Fortune](https://fortune.com/2026/07/16/clarity-act-patrick-mchenry/)*.* Spending more than two decades in Congress, I saw firsthand how legislative momentum can propel our country forward — and how legislative inertia can leave us scrambling to catch up. Today, Congress stands at a crossroads: the United States can remain the world’s technological and financial capital or give it all away, potentially to adversaries who are mounting an active challenge to U.S dominance. The crypto market structure legislation currently moving through Congress, the Clarity Act, is unlike anything we’ve seen since the Telecommunications Act of 1996: a large-scale, forward-looking effort to embrace technological change and introduce consumer safeguards for a nascent technology. Like that earlier landmark law, this effort enjoys broad bipartisan support and requires coordination across multiple committees. And that only happens when Congress recognizes the high stakes. For too long, American financial policy has been in a reactive crouch. Since the 2008 financial crisis, virtually every major piece of legislation – from Dodd-Frank to subsequent banking reforms – has been backward-looking, designed to address past crises rather than prepare for the next frontier. While these measures serve important purposes, they’ve left us with a regulatory framework built for yesterday’s risks, not tomorrow’s opportunities. Crypto market structure legislation can break this pattern. For the first time since the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of nearly three decades ago, we have the chance to enact comprehensive financial policy measures that aren’t precipitated by crisis. Some argue that nearly century-old securities laws already cover what crypto needs, or even claim that the industry would prefer no regulation at all. As someone who has spent his career cutting red tape and championing the free market, I can understand where those arguments come from. In this case, though, they are simply wrong Those who claim the legal status quo for crypto is just fine have not listened to what businesses large and small are actually saying. They are asking for rules to operate. When entrepreneurs know boundaries, they build confidently within them. The internet and the thousands of startups that made America the world’s tech leader flourished not despite regulation, but because smart regulation created the infrastructure and protections users and investors required. Over time, decentralized innovations can also prove their worth within a regulatory framework. But first, we need the framework itself. The framework in the Clarity Act can ensure entrepreneurs feel confident in creating jobs and building businesses without fear of arbitrary or unexplained crackdowns. Upon becoming law, it will establish protections for consumers and investors, and give law enforcement agencies the tools they need to identify and stop criminals and bad actors seeking to hurt the American people. I’m proud of many bills passed during my tenure in Congress, including those I led as chair of the House Committee on Financial Services, that made important strides, but this effort dwarfs them in scope and significance. This legislation is governance at its best: Congress identifying an emerging sector with enormous potential, and responding with the regulatory clarity needed for that sector to flourish within appropriate guardrails. While there is disagreement on precise details, almost everyone – from entrepreneurs and investors to academics and policymakers – agrees that this regulatory clarity is crucial for blockchain technologies and the innovation and economic growth they enable to thrive. What gives me confidence that we are closer than ever to a breakthrough is the remarkably broad support this has garnered in Congress. The GENIUS Act, which regulates stablecoins, passed both chambers of Congress with strong bipartisan backing. And various crypto market-structure bills have attracted sponsors from across parties and the ideological spectrum. Members understand digital assets aren’t disappearing and recognize it’s time to act. Other countries are moving aggressively, and global capital and innovation will flow to markets with clear rules. The Clarity Act is our best chance to maintain America’s role as home for global capital markets deployed in the world’s safest, most resilient regulatory environment, with rule of law and property rights clearly defined. This is about digital assets, but it’s also about deciding if America will lead the 21st-century economy and set the pace for the world or only react to crises. I hope that decision is obvious. *You’re receiving this newsletter because you signed up for it on our websites, at an event, or elsewhere (you can opt out anytime using the ‘unsubscribe’ link below). This newsletter is provided for informational purposes only, and should NOT be relied upon as legal, business, investment, or tax advice. This newsletter may link to other websites or other information obtained from third-party sources — a16z has not independently verified nor makes any representations about the current or enduring accuracy of such information. Furthermore, the content is not directed at nor intended for use by any investors or prospective investors in any a16z funds. Please see a16z.com/disclosures for additional important details, including link to list of investments.*