The Senate’s recent vote to advance the GENIUS stablecoin framework exposed apparent rifts within the Democratic alliance.
Democrats in the US Senate are facing criticism for their role in advancing stablecoin legislation for Senate floor debate.
The bill will now be debated on the Senate floor after 16 Democratic senators deviated from their party lines and passed a resolution to invoke cloture on May 19. In early May, some of the same Democrats backed out of the bill, claiming that President Donald Trump’s bitcoin transactions raised corruption issues.
Opponents of the bill applauded the legislators’ unwillingness to back it, but many were shocked when the senators changed their minds. The slightly modified proposal did not mention the Trump family’s cryptocurrency business, World Liberty Financial.
A developing divide within the Democratic Party over cryptocurrency has led some activists to argue that the Democrats who favor the bill should lose the 2026 Democratic primary.
Democratic senators’ stance on cryptocurrency demonstrates party division.
Senator Mark Warner, a centrist Democrat, declared on May 19 that he would back the plan, calling it “not perfect, but it’s far better than the status quo.”
“Many senators, including myself, have real concerns about the Trump family’s use of crypto technologies to evade oversight […] However, Warner emphasized that we must not let the corruption cloud our understanding of the enduring nature of blockchain technology.
Warner concluded that the US should proceed with its flawed stablecoin legislation rather than lagging behind other jurisdictions.
One of the bill’s supporters, Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, dismissed Trump’s corruption allegations, arguing that they should be handled independently.
Adding that she didn’t want the president’s controversies to “distract us from the important goal of having a clear regulatory structure in the United States that can onshore this industry,” she stated that “a lot of what President Trump is engaged in is already illegal.”
Progressive Democrats disagreed throughout the voting. According to reports, Gillibrand and Senator Elizabeth Warren, the leading Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee and a strong cryptocurrency sector opponent, engaged in a furious confrontation on the Senate floor.
“A bill that accelerates the stablecoin market while enabling the President’s corruption and undermining national security, financial stability, and consumer protection is worse than no bill at all,” Warren contended on the Senate floor before the vote.
Democrats who are against the measure are also not letting up. After voting against the GENIUS Act, Colorado Senator Michael Bennet quickly proposed a new measure that combined the titles of the Senate and House of Representatives bills, humorously naming it the “STABLE GENIUS Act.”
The law would force the president, vice president, and members of Congress to place any assets they own in a blind trust while in office and prohibit them from “issuing or endorsing digital assets.”
The bill has little chance of passing because many bills that would restrict the financial activities of members of Congress have failed, but it does demonstrate that Democrats are divided on how to oppose it.
Democratic activists criticize Democratic GENIUS supporters.
Congressional leadership has been under heavy fire from the Democratic party’s progressive and activist wings for making concessions to Republicans on issues that they say should be deal-breakers.
When Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York and the Senate’s minority leader, sided with the Republicans on a continuing resolution for government funding in March, activists were furious. He gave up power and weakened the Democratic stance, according to one progressive analyst.
The divide was then further widened in April by disputes on how Democrats should respond to Trump’s massive deportations.
Crypto has now become another dividing line between centrists in Congress and the activist wing, responsible for vital voter activation during elections.
Ezra Levin, who is the co-founder and co-executive director of the progressive political group Indivisible, made a statement on BlueSky:
Murshed Zaheed, a communications strategist who formerly worked for Representative Louise Slaughter’s and Senator Harry Reid’s offices, encouraged citizens to call their senators to express opposition to the plan.
“If a Democrat votes for this today and sends out emails, texts, and videos […] talking a big game about Trump’s corruption, they should never be taken seriously again,” he warned.
“I’m excited to get a chance to speak at the California state Democratic convention on May 31.” I’m sure [the bill] won’t come up at all in the 4 minutes I’ve been allotted,” stated Chris Kluwe, a former American football star who is now a well-known Democratic political activist, on May 20.
Peter Labuza, a media law historian and labor researcher, responded to a post by the 16 Democratic senators who backed the measure on BlueSky with the “Primary List.”
The topic of primary elections, which determines the party’s representative in a particular district, has also become controversial.
The results of an internal party vote designating David Hogg as vice chair were declared null and unlawful by the Democratic National Convention (DNC) on May 12. The ruling effectively deprives Hogg of his DNC title and, thus, his capacity to advance his contentious practice of endorsing progressive opponents in Democratic primary contests.
As part of the “Leaders We Deserve” campaign. This activist organization seeks to promote younger leaders with a more aggressive tone against the Trump administration; Hogg had intended to spend $20 million to assist progressive and youthful candidates in Democratic Party primaries.
The Democrats appear ill-prepared to effectively oppose the stablecoin proposals about to advance in the House and Senate. While activists want a new generation of congressmen to represent them next term, internal conflicts and interests within Congress have caused politicians to become divided.
The pro-crypto pragmatists are winning the internal conflict within the Democratic Party against the anti-crypto progressive wing.
