[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 94 (Tuesday, June 3, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Page S3198]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                               GENIUS Act

  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, you never know what you are going to find 
these days when you are reflecting on the Trump administration and our 
oversight responsibilities as the Congress.
  It is true that things have changed. Some people might call me old-
fashioned for thinking this way, but I think we were a lot better off 
when we had Presidents who took it as a matter of course that they 
shouldn't use their office to enrich themselves, and they should put 
behind them conflicts of interest that raise questions about whether or 
not they are serving their own interests or their families' interests 
or the interests of the people of the United States.
  That is why Ronald Reagan put, I think, his wealth, which was 
considerable, into a blind trust. Jimmy Carter, I think, sold maybe his 
farm or put that in a trust.
  I realize it is part of Donald Trump's political charm that he wants 
to wear his corruption on his sleeve, but that doesn't mean that we 
have to go along with it, even if some people are entertained by it, 
which I am not.
  And we have a great example of thinking about our responsibility 
versus his complete lack of integrity when it comes to the service of 
his public duties and his private interests.
  That is the bill--the so-called GENIUS Act--that is on the floor of 
the Senate right now, where we are considering whether or not to 
regulate stablecoins, which are part of the cryptocurrency universe 
that is new to all of us, certainly in this Chamber and across the 
country.
  I believe very strongly that no President and no Vice President, no 
Member of Congress, no high-ranking official of our government should 
be in the business of issuing cryptocurrency, including the stablecoin. 
And they shouldn't be in the business of pumping them up like some sort 
of speculator, which is what we are seeing happen, sometimes outside 
the White House or in the White House.
  I saw, the other day, that the President was having a dinner at Mar-
a-Lago to reward the people who had been bidding up his meme coins, and 
they even came to dinner, although he apparently didn't really show for 
that dinner.
  But the legislation we have in front of us would be the first 
regulations of stablecoins that have ever been done. I think, as part 
of that, it would be very appropriate for us to say that the President 
should get out of this business and that any President should be out of 
the business of issuing their own coins.
  It is a weird part of the nature of this asset--this new digital 
asset--that it is very volatile. The meme coins rise and they fall as 
part of their price, and the stablecoins are used as a way of 
transacting around that volatility. But the volatility, every single 
day, is still captured in this market, and it just seems like a crazy 
moment when we are living in a time when a President could influence 
his own net worth to the tune of billions of dollars, just based on 
pumping up the value of digital currency that he has put out there in 
the world with his name or that somebody else has put out there in the 
world with his name.
  That is why, yesterday, I offered an amendment to the bill, to the 
GENIUS Act, that would preclude any President--this President or any 
other President or any Vice President--from issuing stablecoins. I hope 
we will consider that amendment on the floor of the Senate. I hope we 
will vote to pass it, if we are, indeed, going to pass this 
legislation. And I hope we will have other amendments we consider as 
well.
  I think that the questions that are at issue here from an ethics 
point of view, from a corruption point of view, go far beyond just the 
stablecoin. They go to cryptocurrency, generally, and what the 
President is doing to inflate the value of coins that are issued in his 
name, whether he has issued them or whether he hasn't.
  I look forward to the debate that we are going to have. I think this 
is an opportunity for us to say that we want to elevate the 
requirements that each one of us has agreed to live under, as Members 
of this body and people elected to act in the public interest. I 
believe the President and his Vice President should face the same 
standard and the same scrutiny. That is why I offered the amendment 
that I have.
  I hope that, as our colleagues consider the debate that we are going 
to have, that others will come to the floor with their ideas to 
strengthen this legislation and make sure that people don't abuse their 
public office for their own personal economic gain.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.