Both sides want changes to the Senate crypto bill. What actually gets fixed?

Congress is back and the Senate’s draft for crypto market rules is already getting heat from two unlikely places. Senator Warren’s team says it is unsafe and weak on oversight. A big chunk of the crypto industry says they can’t back it unless it protects software developers and non-custodial tools. When your loudest critics both say “change it,” something will move.

The Senate draft tries to set who regulates what and how tokens get treated.

Warren’s side warns it cuts the SEC’s reach and could put retirement accounts at risk.

Builders warn it leaves devs exposed just for writing code or running non-custodial software.

The House already passed a bill that is friendlier to self-custody and open source.

So the gap is clear.

What matters for markets is not the press quotes. It’s the edits:

• Do we get clear protection for open-source work?

• Do we get a bright line for when something is a security vs a commodity?

• Do exchanges get a path to list without guessing which regulator will show up?

If those points land, the cost of doing business in the US drops and listings get less scary. If not, teams will keep shipping outside the US and the best liquidity will follow.

• Does the Senate add explicit developer protections?

• Do they keep or kill self-certify ideas?

• Which Democrats join Republicans on a final text?

• Can Senate and House square their differences fast enough to matter this year?

I’m not calling this bullish or bearish. It’s about removing fog. Less fog means cleaner pricing and fewer random legal surprises. If you trade this, track committee markups and amendments, not just headlines.

Where do you think the first real compromise will show up?