The identity positioning of stablecoins has become a major issue—are they financial investment products or truly a form of currency? This seemingly simple question involves the entire regulatory framework behind it.

To clarify these definitions, the U.S. Congress introduced the Digital Asset Clarification Act after the Geniuses Act, originally aiming to provide a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins. But what happened? It instead sparked an even bigger controversy. The CEO of a leading exchange publicly criticized Congress for favoring the banking industry, exposing the contradictions between the crypto industry and traditional finance. The U.S. Congress's discussions on cryptocurrency legislation are now caught in a dilemma.

Interestingly, Michael Novogratz, CEO of Galaxy Digital, has come out to oppose this view. He disagrees with the recent withdrawal of support for the bill by the CEO of a major exchange. Novogratz's stance is straightforward—rather than pursuing perfection, it’s better to build the framework first. He emphasizes that the most urgent need for the crypto industry right now is to establish a workable regulatory system. Move quickly, then gradually refine the details—that’s the right approach.

In an interview with the media, Novogratz bluntly said: Even if the Digital Asset Clarification Act isn’t perfect, so what? It can be amended later. His reasoning is very convincing—this industry has waited too long for clear regulatory standards. If legislation continues to be delayed, the ultimate victim will be the development pace of the entire crypto industry.

From the perspective of legislative progress, this is a debate over strategic choices. One side advocates for improving regulation, while the other calls for establishing a framework first and then refining it. How to proceed seems to be a litmus test for the maturity of the entire ecosystem.