U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, known as “Pelosi’s closest friend in Congress” and comes from the same state (California) and is a member of the same party (democrat).

Eshoo has requested the highest ranking senator, Speaker Pelosi, to correct the definition of the term “broker” in the Senate’s infrastructure bill, (correctly) saying it's too broad and may be difficult for some entities to comply with.

In an open letter she writes “When the House takes up the Senate bill, I encourage you to amend the problematic broker definition in Section 80603 of the legislation”.

Eshoo joins a growing group of bipartisan lawmakers pushing back against the crypto provision. House Financial Services Committee Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) and a handful of other Congressmen on both sides of the political aisle have expressed their support for changing the language.

The infrastructure bill, a priority for U.S. President Joe Biden, will fund $1 trillion in infrastructure improvements or new initiatives around the country, such as passenger rail and electric vehicle charging. Some $550 billion of this will come from new spending, including “pay-fors,” measures meant to raise funds to pay for the initiatives in the bill.

Under the current terms of the provision, any entity that facilitates a crypto transaction on behalf of another person would be treated as a broker, meaning they would have to file specific tax information reports which would include know-your-customer details. However, industry proponents are concerned that this would include miners or other network validators and hardware developers, who don’t typically have access to this sort of information.

Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) proposed an amendment to narrow the scope of the language, while the provision’s original author, Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) as well as Senators Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) introduced a different amendment. Ultimately, the Senate proceeded without considering any amendments, leading to the majority of the group introducing a compromise amendment that was blocked under Senate procedural rules.

Leaving the big question - will Pelosi go against President Biden, whos has shown a severe lack of understanding when it comes to anything tech related? Supporting the bill in it's current form being the latest example.

This as Biden's approval hit new lows today, with 2 polls, Economist/YouGov and Quinnipiac both showing him at 47% (For perspective, Obama was at 62%, Bush Jr was at 55.8% at the same time into their presidency)

The house expected to take up the bill when it returns at the end of August when it returns from recess.

------- 
Author: Vincent Russo
Los Angeles News Desk

Slipped into the senate infrastructure bill is a crypto provision that has nothing to do with infrastructure whatsoever.  While the right thing to do is remove it entirely, we know that's not going to happen.

The basics:

The intent being given to the public is to stop people from avoiding taxes, so it requires brokers to report transactions to the government.  Now we already expect US based exchanges to be doing this, they already do with high value traders, and upon request.

We expect government to make an effort to collect correct taxes from citizens - that's not the issue.

The problem is they've defined a 'broker' in such vague terms, people who aren't running any type of exchange will in many cases need to add on new code to their creations so they can properly spy on users and turn over the required data to the government.

Coders making blockchain based apps are being put under the same umbrella as major exchanges like Coinbase under this crypto bill.

In short: tech illiterate politicians wrote something they shouldn't have, and slipped it into a bill where it doesn't belong.  But what's done is done, the vote is happening.

There are some at least trying to amend it to something more reasonable...

Call 517-200-9518 and you'll be automatically connected to your local senator.  Or go here and enter your phone number.

Tell your senators to:

• Vote NO on the Warner-Portman-Sinema amendment (this amendment modifies some parts of the senate crypto bill, but does not solve the problems)
  
  
• Then vote YES on the Wyden-Lummis-Toomey amendment (this one actually fixes the worst parts!)

FightForTheFuture suggests saying something along the lines of...

"Hi, I’m calling to ask that you support the Wyden-Toomey-Lummis amendment to the cryptocurrency provision of the infrastructure bill (H.R. 3684) . This amendment will ensure that the provision does not dramatically expand financial surveillance, harm innovation, or undermine human rights. I also ask that you vote NO on the Warner-Portman-Sinema amendment, which is being described as a compromise but would be a disaster for the technology. Policies that impact basic freedom and the future of the Internet should be debated carefully and should never be attached to must-pass bills. Thank you."

If you can't call, at least tweet... or do both!

You can find your senators Twitter usernames by going to http://www.tweetcongress.org/tweeters Note that this lists your states congress members as well, but only the senate is voting tomorrow. 

Don't wish you did once it's too late!

---------------
Author: Oliver Redding
Seattle Newsdesk  / Breaking Crypto News