Notice: Informational analysis, does not constitute financial advice. Data verified on August 4, 2026; the Polymarket figure was consulted live at 15:02 UTC that day against the market's public API, not third-party coverage. The Senate schedule is subject to change without notice. CleanSky does not receive commissions or referral payments from any cited platform.
The United States Senate has until Wednesday, August 5, to file a cloture motion (the formal request that ends debate and forces a vote) if it wants the CLARITY Act to reach the floor before recess. As of 15:02 UTC on August 4, the Polymarket market on the bill's passage in 2026 was trading at 23.5%, nine points below the 32.5% at which our previous piece closed on July 24. In between, there was an intraday low of 21.5% on July 31 and a rebound to 34.5% on August 2 after a bipartisan compromise on the ethics clause was leaked. This article covers only that ten-day delta: the actual price series versus the conflicting figures in circulation, the exact procedural arithmetic remaining until Friday the 7th, the status of the Tillis-Gallego agreement, and what new elements the SEC has added to its regulatory alternative since April.
What is the Polymarket market signaling today and why don't published figures match?
Figures circulating between July 29 and August 1 range from 24% to 33% depending on the outlet. These are not contradictory by error: each captures a different hour of a market that moved more than ten points in forty-eight hours. The full hourly series for the "Clarity Act (H.R.3633) signed into law in 2026" contract, consulted on August 4 at 15:02 UTC, reveals the trajectory (the August 4 row reflects the price at the time of consultation, not a session close).
| Date (UTC) | Close | Intraday Low | Intraday High | Market Driver |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul-24-2026 | 32.5% | 31.5% | 38.5% | Inherited starting point: Democratic rejection of revised ethics text |
| Jul-26-2026 | 37.5% | 35.5% | 38.5% | Weekend rebound ahead of floor week |
| Jul-27-2026 | 37.5% | 37.5% | 37.5% | Flat day; Atkins states on CNBC that the SEC can act alone |
| Jul-29-2026 | 27.5% | 26.5% | 30.5% | Senate dedicates week to nominations and sanctions |
| Jul-30-2026 | 29.5% | 24.5% | 31.5% | Tillis and Gallego send ethics proposal to the White House |
| Jul-31-2026 | 24.5% | 21.5% | 30.5% | Contract all-time low: week close without White House response |
| Aug-1-2026 | 28.5% | 25.0% | 33.0% | Compromise details emerge; White House reviews over weekend |
| Aug-2-2026 | 29.0% | 27.0% | 34.5% | Leg high; expectation of cloture motion in the final week |
| Aug-3-2026 | 26.5% | 25.5% | 30.5% | Opening of final floor week without the bill on Monday's agenda |
| Aug-4-2026 (15:02) | 23.5% | 23.5% | 26.5% | Second day with no motion filed; price returns to the low end of the July range |
The contract's all-time low since its launch on January 11 was not the 24% reported, but the 21.5% touched in the early hours of July 31. Furthermore, the "record low of 27%" headline from July 29 was surpassed two days later. Ten days of panic and rebound leave a net balance of three points: the market has recovered almost everything that was discounted, while the underlying obstacle—floor time—has not moved an inch.
It is useful to read the percentage knowing what condition the contract requires for a payout. The published market rules resolve to "Yes" only if the bill is passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President by 11:59 PM ET on December 31, 2026, using the Congress.gov legislative tracker as the primary resolution source. A favorable Senate vote in September would not suffice: the House of Representatives would have to concur with Senate amendments, followed by the presidential signature. The 23.5% prices the entire journey—Senate, House, and signature—compressed into five calendar months, two of which are election months.
A note on market depth to keep in mind when reading these percentages: the contract has accumulated $3.85 million in historical volume but only about $94,000 in order book liquidity, with a one-point bid-ask spread (0.23 / 0.24 at the time of consultation). Volume over the last week was $968,455, four times the pace of the previous month. With such a book, orders of a few tens of thousands of dollars move the price several points, which is exactly what is seen in the intraday ranges of July 30 and 31.
Why does the real window close on Wednesday, August 5, and not Friday, August 7?
The 2026 Senate calendar sets the state work period—the summer recess—from August 10 to September 11. The last day of floor session is, therefore, Friday, August 7. But the clock that matters is not that one, but Rule XXII: a cloture petition filed one day is not voted on that same day. It matures after an intervening session day and is voted on the following day. Filing on Wednesday the 5th allows for a vote on Friday the 7th; filing on Thursday the 6th does not allow for any vote before the recess.
| Step | Deadline | Votes Needed | Status as of Aug-4 15:02 UTC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motion to proceed to H.R. 3633 (Calendar No. 423) | Wed Aug-5 | — | Not filed |
| Ordinary cloture petition on that motion (16 signatures) | Wed Aug-5 | 60 | Not in cloture record |
| Cloture vote on motion to proceed | Fri Aug-7 | 60 | Not scheduled |
| Up to 30 hours of post-cloture debate | Would overflow into recess | — | Unfeasible this week |
| Second cloture, on the bill text | September | 60 | Outside August window |
| House concurrence with Senate amendments | No date | 218 | Pending |
The published agenda for Monday, August 3, contained a single roll-call vote: cloture on H.R. 6500, the government funding resolution, at 5:30 PM ET. The CLARITY Act did not appear. The Senate cloture record, updated through July 31, shows the July 30 filing for H.R. 6500 and no entries for H.R. 3633 or the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act.
A fast-track route exists: the abbreviated bipartisan petition, which requires sixteen signatures split between the two leaders, seven senators not affiliated with the majority, and seven not affiliated with the minority. It reduces maturation times but does not manufacture votes: it still requires fourteen senators from both sides to sign before knowing if the final ethics text satisfies them. The full mechanics of thresholds and the sixty-vote arithmetic are broken down in our July floor analysis.
What changed with the Tillis-Gallego ethics compromise?
The ethics clause is the piece that has blocked the deal since May: it prohibits senior federal officials from issuing or sponsoring digital assets. The version backed by the White House on July 21 left enforcement exclusively to the Department of Justice, which Democrats rejected on July 22 and 23 as practically unenforceable.
Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) drafted a middle-ground formula on Wednesday, July 29, and sent it to the White House on Thursday, the 30th. It does not change the underlying prohibition: it changes who enforces it, adding state attorneys general alongside the Department of Justice. By mid-afternoon Friday the 31st, the White House had not formally responded, and the weekend was spent reviewing it. The full legislative text remained non-public as of August 4, with the White House still silent five days after receiving it.
This fact explains the eight-point rebound between the July 31 low and the August 2 high. It also explains its fragility: the market is pricing the probability of an agreement whose specific language no one has read. The clause exists due to crypto interests linked to the presidential family, a front that remains open in parallel via administrative channels—the national trust bank charter application with the OCC analyzed in the piece on World Liberty Financial continues its processing, with the Comptroller defending in parliamentary hearings that the process complies with applicable ethics rules.
Why wouldn't a cloture vote this week get the bill out of the Senate?
Even if the petition were filed Wednesday and sixty votes were reached Friday, what would have been approved is the motion to proceed: permission to begin debate. Following that are up to thirty hours of post-cloture debate, a second cloture on the text, another thirty hours, and the final vote. That path does not fit into two session days. Industry observers pushing for a vote this week openly describe it as a positioning maneuver for September, not an attempt at passage.
The arithmetic has not improved either. Republicans control 53 seats and the threshold is 60, so seven Democrats are needed. On the favorable side, two have been identified since the Banking Committee markup, which passed the text 15-9 in May: Ruben Gallego and Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD). On the opposing side, seven Democratic negotiators stated in July that the draft fell short, and Chris Murphy, Chris Van Hollen, and Jeff Merkley formalized their opposition when a merged version removed the ethics clause. Elizabeth Warren has rejected the revised text. Since the 15-9 vote in May, no new Democrat has publicly joined the "yes" camp: the deficit remains five votes.
How much time does the bill lose if the Senate leaves without voting?
From August 7—the last floor day—to September 14—the first Monday after the state work period, which ends September 11—there are thirty-eight calendar days without a single minute of available floor time. Upon return, the September calendar is dominated by government funding, and starting in October, the midterm election campaign for November 3 empties the Senate of legislative time. The realistic window is compressed into the weeks of September and a potential lame-duck session between November and December, with the House also having to concur with Senate amendments before December 31 for the Polymarket contract to resolve as "Yes."
Galaxy Research cut its 2026 passage estimate on July 24 from 50% to 30%, and its head of research set July 30 as the practical deadline to start voting, describing the necessary coalition as "not visibly formed" and the remaining path as a "last-minute effort." That date has passed. Through August 3 both readings agreed—the institutional desk at 30%, the market around 29%—despite stemming from different methodologies: one reads vote arithmetic, the other order flow. On August 4 the price broke below that estimate: 23.5% at 15:02 UTC, six and a half points under the institutional reading. The divergence matters more than the earlier convergence: order flow is no longer waiting for the motion.
What is new in the SEC's regulatory Plan B?
SEC Chairman Paul Atkins stated on CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" on Monday, July 27, that the agency is "ready, willing, and able" to issue rules covering the same issues as the CLARITY Act if Congress fails to act. In substance, this is a reiteration of the framework the SEC had already outlined in April—the three exemption paths, the $75 million safe harbor for issuances, the four-criteria decentralization test, and the broker-dealer exemption for wallets and aggregators, all detailed in our analysis of Regulation Crypto. The relevant part of the statement is the less-cited second half: Atkins added that "statute is the way to future-proof something" and that the market needs "the certainty of a law" so the framework doesn't change with every administration. The regulator himself is describing his Plan B as inferior to Plan A.
There is, however, a new formal element post-April, and it is not in the interview. On July 7, 2026, the SEC published its annual regulatory agenda with three crypto files incorporated, each with its Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) in the federal unified agenda: 3235-AN38 (crypto asset offerings and capital raising via token sales), 3235-AN48 (financial responsibility and reporting for broker-dealers custodying or trading crypto assets), and 3235-AN49 (market structure for alternative trading systems and national exchanges operating digital assets). All three appear in the 2026 unified regulatory agenda in the proposal stage.
The distance between that status and an enforceable rule is long: formal proposal, public comment period, review, and final adoption, with the agency's recent precedent hovering around twelve to eighteen months per full cycle. Furthermore, a rule adopted by a five-member commission can be reversed by the next commission through the same procedure, something a law passed by both houses does not allow. This asymmetry is why the industry has invested two years of lobbying in a bill rather than settling for administrative interpretation.
Additionally, there is a part of the problem the SEC cannot solve with these three rules or any others. The core of the CLARITY Act is the division of powers between two agencies: assigning the CFTC oversight of spot markets for digital assets classified as commodities. An agency cannot grant jurisdiction to another via regulation; that transfer requires a law. Everything the SEC approves on its own defines what stays outside its own perimeter, leaving whatever falls outside in a regulatory no-man's-land. The memorandum of understanding between both agencies that accompanied the April framework coordinates criteria and shares information, but it does not create the statutory authority the CFTC would need to register and supervise spot platforms.
How does this outcome differ from the GENIUS Act?
On July 18, the other major US crypto regulatory deadline of the summer expired, and it expired differently: it was an administrative implementation deadline that passed without ceremony, with regulators either publishing or not publishing their rules within an already existing legal framework. No one had to gather sixty votes or find floor days. The calendar was internal.
The CLARITY Act is played on the opposite field: a technically closed text—the allocation of powers between the CFTC for digital assets considered commodities and the SEC for those considered securities has been negotiated since May—stuck on two factors beyond the negotiators' control: floor time and outside votes. The bill passed the House 294-134 in July 2025 and the Senate Banking Committee 15-9 in May 2026. Thirteen months after that House vote, the file remains on the legislative calendar with an order number and no date.
What to watch between now and August 7?
Five binary signals concentrate all useful information this week. Each is verifiable without intermediaries:
- White House response to the Tillis-Gallego text (Monday 3rd or Tuesday 4th). Without a green light, there is no incentive for the Majority Leader to spend floor time on a motion that would fail.
- Publication of the ethics clause language. As long as the text is not public, the seven necessary Democrats cannot commit, and the market price discounts an unverified agreement.
- Filing of the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633 before the close of Wednesday the 5th. This is the only data point that makes the week votable; it appears in the Senate cloture record the same day.
- Public count of signatories if the abbreviated bipartisan petition is chosen: sixteen signatures with the seven-and-seven split reveal if the coalition exists before the vote.
- SEC publication of any of the three files (3235-AN38, AN48, or AN49) in the Federal Register. This would be the signal that the agency has stopped waiting for Congress.
If Friday the 7th ends without a motion filed, the Polymarket contract will remain open until December 31, but its resolution will depend on a September stretch compressed between government funding and the election campaign. And the effective regulatory framework for digital assets in the United States during 2027 will be written by a commission of five appointees, using rules 3235-AN38, AN48, and AN49 as the vehicle, rather than a legal text with sixty votes behind it.
Related articles: The previous episode in this series, featuring the Polymarket curve from 82% in February to 32.5% on July 24. Cloture mechanics and the sixty-vote arithmetic. SEC Regulation Crypto framework in detail: three exemption paths and $75 million safe harbor. Track your positions and lending exposure on CleanSky while the US regulatory framework is decided.