Opposition is ineffective😂···It seems that bankers still want to enter the crypto industry😂····

Amendment to the "CLARITY Act" prohibiting federal agencies from bailing out digital assets was rejected
On May 15, Senator Smith proposed an amendment during the Senate Banking Committee review of the "CLARITY Act," and I believe we can all agree that crypto assets are extremely volatile, with a single tweet capable of causing sharp price swings. For example, Bitcoin has fallen nearly one-third since reaching a record high last October, and its value has dropped more than half from its peak. And these are just two of the most mainstream assets in the crypto market. During the 2022 crypto crash, nearly $2 trillion worth of crypto assets evaporated. I am quite concerned that the current version of the bill being debated today will ensure that the next crash is even bigger than the one in 2022. Therefore, the purpose of this amendment is simple: to prohibit federal agencies from rescuing digital assets, preventing us taxpayers from footing the bill. When that happens—I should say "when that happens"—taxpayers should not be dragged down with it.
Senator Cynthia Lummis opposed the amendment, stating that the "CLARITY Act" does not authorize bailouts of the crypto industry. It sets rules for digital assets and does not create bailout guarantees or taxpayer backing. This amendment is unnecessary and distracts from the core purpose of the bill. We should focus on establishing a clear regulatory framework rather than banning something that does not yet exist.
The amendment was rejected with 11 votes in favor and 13 votes against. The "Cryptocurrency Market Structure Act" (i.e., the CLARITY Act) is currently voting on each amendment one by one.