The CLARITY Act should pass. Not because every digital asset is legitimate, every token has value or every participant deserves our trust. It should pass because this market already exists, millions of Americans are participating in it and regulatory confusion is not consumer protection. For too long, businesses and consumers have been forced to operate in a system where the rules are often established after the fact through enforcement actions and lawsuits. The CLARITY Act would begin defining which digital assets are securities, which are commodities, whether the SEC or CFTC has jurisdiction and what exchanges, brokers and other intermediaries must do to operate legally. That means registration, meaningful disclosure, protection of customer assets, management of conflicts of interest and real accountability when someone commits fraud. For everyday Americans, this is about much more than buying and selling cryptocurrency. It is about the future of ownership, access and the movement of money. Tokenization can allow ownership rights in real world assets such as stocks, bonds, funds, real estate interests, intellectual property and other assets to be represented on a secure digital ledger. Over time, that could make it possible to divide certain assets into smaller, more affordable pieces, settle transactions faster, automate payments and maintain a transparent record of ownership. It could give smaller investors access to opportunities that have historically been available primarily to large institutions and wealthy individuals. It could also help entrepreneurs and growing businesses reach new sources of capital. But tokenization is not magic, and a token is not valuable simply because it exists on a blockchain. Its value must come from a legitimate underlying asset or enforceable right. Investors need to know exactly what they own, who controls the asset, what fees they are paying, whether they have voting or income rights, where their money is held and what happens if the platform fails. Technology should make ownership clearer. It should not create a new way to disguise risk. There are also legitimate concerns surrounding the legislation. Ethics rules governing elected officials and their families must be strong, enforceable and applied regardless of political party. State attorneys general must retain meaningful authority to pursue fraud. Anti-money-laundering requirements, cybersecurity standards and custody protections must be real. Congress must ensure that companies cannot escape securities laws simply by attaching the word token to an investment. Consumers should receive understandable disclosures, not hundreds of pages designed to protect lawyers instead of investors. Those issues should be fixed. They should not become an excuse to abandon the work. America has a choice. We can establish responsible rules here that protect consumers while allowing legitimate innovation to develop, or we can force the technology, jobs and investment overseas while Americans continue participating through platforms operating beyond the reach of our regulators. Doing nothing does not stop digital assets or tokenization. It simply leaves good actors without a dependable rulebook and consumers with fewer protections against bad actors. The CLARITY Act may not be perfect, but the answer is to strengthen it, finish it and pass it. Innovation and consumer protection are not opposing ideas. Done correctly, each makes the other possible. @votetimscott