天才行为回来了

加密律师约翰·迪顿（John Deaton）认为，直到美国中期大选之后，现在就可以冻结加密法律的真正进步，甚至更长。

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》是两党为加密景观带来稳定的努力，经过一段时间的停滞，正返回参议院。虽然被誉为迈向加密法规的适度一步，但该法案的命运仍然不确定。

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.

尽管双方的支持以及双方参议员表达的紧迫性，以迅速将法案带回，但批评者并没有阻止。参议员伊丽莎白·沃伦（Elizabeth Warren）表示担心该法案可以为科技巨头垄断支付部门铺平道路，从而扼杀较小的球员。

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.

该法案始于众议院，试图为与法定货币绑定的稳定币创建一个框架，以防止更广泛的镇压加密货币。但是，它面临着持续的障碍。

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.

加密律师约翰·迪顿（John Deaton）以XRP持有人的代表而闻名，他认为未能通过《天才法案》可能会有更广泛的影响，直到美国中期大选之后（即使没有更长的时间），就可以使对加密货币立法的进展取得了成功。

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强调了自1931年以来最狭窄的众议院多数席位，并预期了通常的中期权力转移。他断言，这个窗口正在迅速关闭。如果Deaton形容为无争议的国家利益的《天才法》未能通过参议院，那么更复杂的加密法案就不会出现在议程上。

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.

迪顿（Deaton）批评该法案是因为省略了稳定持有人的利息支付，这一举动旨在安抚银行，并在很大程度上进行了调整，以容纳银行业大会。在最后的法案中，这种遗漏是显而易见的。

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

他声称，结果是一项避免争议的法案，但使散户投资者陷入困境。