The CLARITY Act represents the most consequential financial market legislation Congress has taken up in years. At its foundation, the bill accomplishes something straightforward: it sets clear regulatory rules for an industry that has operated in uncertainty for nearly a decade. Specifically, the legislation would establish a division of oversight between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission based on whether a blockchain network is sufficiently decentralized—a threshold that determines whether a digital asset is treated as a security or a commodity. Yet lawmakers risk squandering a critical opportunity to provide the regulatory clarity this sector has long sought.

Markets function best with well-defined rules. Entrepreneurs build, and institutions invest, when the regulatory landscape is clear. Consumers receive stronger protections when all participants understand the framework. Today, some of the world's foremost innovators are constructing the next generation of onchain financial infrastructure in the United States, but for years they have navigated a system shaped more by enforcement actions and lawsuits than by coherent legislation.

That status quo serves no one—not investors, not innovation, and certainly not American competitiveness. While domestic regulators and lawmakers debate in circles, other nations are advancing their own frameworks and moving ahead. The European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, known as MiCA, began taking effect in 2024, establishing a comprehensive licensing and consumer protection regime across all 27 member states. Singapore, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom have similarly moved to implement tailored digital asset frameworks.

Each day Congress delays, it signals that the United States is willing to export the next era of financial innovation, along with the associated jobs and economic expansion, to other jurisdictions.

This is why the CLARITY Act matters. It is not merely a cryptocurrency bill. It is legislation that will determine whether the United States intends to lead the future of finance or cede that position to others.

The concerns surrounding the legislation are genuine. Anthony Scaramucci has been one of Donald Trump's most vocal critics since his brief tenure in the Trump White House. He does not believe elected officials or their families should issue cryptocurrencies, promote meme coins, or create any appearance of profiting from public office. He has also questioned whether they should trade equities, though he acknowledges that is a separate battle. Public trust remains essential, and ethics rules carry real weight.

Democrats were correct to insist these concerns be addressed. Over the course of negotiations, Republicans and the White House accepted ethics provisions that would have been considered unthinkable only months earlier. The legislation improved because lawmakers raised legitimate issues, and those issues were taken seriously. That process reflects exactly how bipartisan lawmaking should function.

The conversation has since shifted again. The debate is no longer about whether the CLARITY Act contains adequate ethics provisions. It has become a question of whether this single bill should serve as the vehicle for overhauling the broader framework of federal ethics law.

Those are distinct issues. No state attorney generals currently hold jurisdiction over ethics matters, and attempting to alter that paradigm now would jeopardize the best opportunity to cement America as the global hub of financial innovation for decades ahead.

If Congress believes federal ethics laws require strengthening, Scaramucci agrees—and argues Congress should do exactly that. Lawmakers should tighten conflict-of-interest rules, enhance disclosure requirements, and revisit insider trading statutes. Crucially, those reforms should be applied uniformly across equities, private enterprises, real estate, and digital assets.

But holding America's financial and technological future hostage in an attempt to resolve every ethics question through a single market structure bill is the wrong approach.

No major legislation has ever been required to resolve every problem confronting Congress before passage. The CLARITY Act should not be held to a different standard simply because the underlying technology is novel or the political dynamics are uncomfortable.

Some critics contend the current ethics provisions remain insufficient. Reasonable people can disagree on where to draw lines. Yet every negotiation reaches a juncture where the central question shifts from "How do we improve this bill?" to "Are we willing to let the perfect become the enemy of the good?"

Congress is approaching that juncture.

Entrepreneurs do not have the luxury of waiting. Capital does not pause while Washington negotiates. Engineers do not halt their work because lawmakers cannot agree on legislative language. Companies make daily decisions about where to invest, where to hire, and where to launch products. Those decisions are increasingly being made outside the United States—a trend that should concern every member of Congress, regardless of party affiliation.

The current debate over digital assets ultimately concerns whether America still believes innovation should take place within its borders. It is about whether the nation will write the rules for emerging technologies or allow other countries to set them. And it is about whether Congress remains capable of bipartisan compromise on matters central to the country's economic future.

The CLARITY Act is not a flawless bill. Significant legislation rarely is. But it represents a serious, bipartisan effort to replace regulatory uncertainty with transparent rules, robust consumer protections, and a framework enabling innovation to thrive under American law rather than migrating overseas.

The ethics debate strengthened the bill. It compelled lawmakers to confront difficult but vital questions about public trust and conflicts of interest. However, that debate should not become the reason America forfeits its opportunity to lead.

Congress should pass the CLARITY Act before that opportunity slips away.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Anthony Scaramucci is founder and managing partner of SkyBridge Capital, co-host of The Rest Is Politics US podcast, and author of the upcoming book "All the Wrong Moves."

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com.