天才行為回來了

加密律師約翰·迪頓（John Deaton）認為，直到美國中期大選之後，現在就可以凍結加密法律的真正進步，甚至更長。

The GENIUS Act, a bipartisan effort to bring stability to the crypto landscape, is returning to the Senate floor after a period of stasis. While hailed as a modest step toward crypto regulation, the bill’s fate remains uncertain.

《天才法案》是兩黨為加密景觀帶來穩定的努力，經過一段時間的停滯，正返回參議院。雖然被譽為邁向加密法規的適度一步，但該法案的命運仍然不確定。

Despite the bipartisan support and the urgency expressed by senators from both parties to quickly bring the bill back, critics are not holding back. Senator Elizabeth Warren has voiced concerns that the bill could pave the way for tech giants to monopolize the payments sector, thereby stifling smaller players.

儘管雙方的支持以及雙方參議員表達的緊迫性，以迅速將法案帶回，但批評者並沒有阻止。參議員伊麗莎白·沃倫（Elizabeth Warren）表示擔心該法案可以為科技巨頭壟斷支付部門鋪平道路，從而扼殺較小的球員。

The bill, which began in the House, is an attempt to create a framework for stablecoins tied to fiat currency, aiming to prevent a broader crackdown on crypto. However, it has faced persistent roadblocks.

該法案始於眾議院，試圖為與法定貨幣綁定的穩定幣創建一個框架，以防止更廣泛的鎮壓加密貨幣。但是，它面臨著持續的障礙。

Crypto lawyer John Deaton, known for his representation of XRP holders, believes that failure to pass the GENIUS Act could have broader implications, setting back progress on crypto legislation until after the midterm U.S. elections, if not longer.

加密律師約翰·迪頓（John Deaton）以XRP持有人的代表而聞名，他認為未能通過《天才法案》可能會有更廣泛的影響，直到美國中期大選之後（即使沒有更長的時間），就可以使對加密貨幣立法的進展取得了成功。

Deaton highlights the narrowest House majority since 1931 and the anticipation of the usual midterm power shift. He asserts that this window is rapidly closing. If the GENIUS Act, which Deaton describes as uncontroversial and in the national interest, fails to pass the Senate, then more complex crypto bills will not be on the agenda.

Deaton強調了自1931年以來最狹窄的眾議院多數席位，並預期了通常的中期權力轉移。他斷言，這個窗口正在迅速關閉。如果Deaton形容為無爭議的國家利益的《天才法》未能通過參議院，那麼更複雜的加密法案就不會出現在議程上。

Deaton criticizes the bill for omitting interest payments for stablecoin holders, a move designed to appease banks and an adjustment made largely to accommodate the banking lobby. This omission is evident in the final bill.

迪頓（Deaton）批評該法案是因為省略了穩定持有人的利息支付，這一舉動旨在安撫銀行，並在很大程度上進行了調整，以容納銀行業大會。在最後的法案中，這種遺漏是顯而易見的。

The result, he claims, is a bill that shies away from controversy but leaves retail investors out in the cold.

他聲稱，結果是一項避免爭議的法案，但使散戶投資者陷入困境。