Who?
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) — Co-author, Durbin-Marshall Credit Card Competition Act
LISTEN: Laslo & Marshall
Ask a Pol asks:
Did we hear your Durbin-Marshall credit card competition amendment is getting a vote as a part of the Senate’s stablecoin debate over the Genius Act?
Key Marshall:
“I don’t know that,” Sen. Roger Marshall exclusively told Ask a Pol. “We’ll see.”
ICYMI — Sen. Cynthia Lummis fears Durbin-Marshall could derail stablecoin
Some complain your bill doesn’t belong on stablecoin?
Some people say your measure isn’t related to stablecoin and belongs somewhere else because it could derail entire GENIUS Act — why’s it important to you?
“Well, certainly it's a banking bill, and this has been a Banking Committee issue,” Marshall says. “What's important is, it helps hard working men and women, it helps Main Street so it's important for the American public.”
Caught our ear per Trump’s ‘One big, beautiful bill’:
“There's a lot of things that are being done by states that would be, you know, considered money laundering,” Marshall told us.
Below find a rough transcript of Ask a Pol’s exclusive interview with Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), slightly edited for clarity.
TRANSCRIPT: Sen. Roger Marshall
SCENE: Ask a Pol’s Matt Laslo runs into Sen. Roger Marshall in the basement of the US Capitol as he’s making his way to the Senate floor, so he hops an elevator with the senator…
Matt Laslo: “Did I hear your amendment [Durbin-Marshall] is getting a vote?”
Roger Marshall: “I don’t know that.”
ML: “Well, not confirmed but you want it?”
RM: “We’ll see.”
SUBSCRIBER-ONLY CONTENT*
*Student? Lost your gig? Hard times? Been there. Got you.
No questions asked. Just ping us.
ML: “Why’s that important? Some people say it's not related to stablecoin or digital currencies and belongs somewhere else.”
RM: “Yeah. Well, certainly it's a banking bill, and this has been a Banking Committee issue. And what's important is, it helps hard working men and women, it helps Main Street, so it's important for the American public to get it.”
ML: “And now, you aren't even a fan of the underlying stablecoin measure — or are you? Do you have concerns?”
RM: “I feel a lot better about this than just generally — than cryptocurrency in general.”
ML: “Yeah?”
RM: “I think that this is a huge step in the right direction. I like that this is — that these are all backed by American dollars, right?”
ML: “Yeah.”
RM: “And I think that they're making a huge attempt to know their customer. So I think this is a huge step in the right direction. I'm a — but, as opposed to just crypto in general, I'm still have concerns about it.”
ML: “Yeah? People think that this, if it passes — the stablecoin measure — then that kind of opens the floodgates for more crypto legislation. Do you think that would be good? Or is that like, miss-assessing things?”
RM: “I don't have an opinion.”
ML: “Yeah?”
RM: “I don’t. I'm so wrapped around the axle on this ‘one big, beautiful bill’ getting it across the finish line and a Farm Bill that beyond, beyond this particular bill is all I really have a good grasp of from a crypto standpoint.”
ML: “Well — you brought it up — what do you think of the reconciliation bill as it stands in the House?”
RM: “You know, I think that's a huge — they're going in the right direction, and I'm cheering them on.”
ML: “Yeah?”
RM: “And we need to improve it, and that's what's supposed to happen.”
ML: “Yeah?”
RM: “So I think that we have to get to $2 trillion of less spending to accomplish everything that President Trump wants to do, and I don't think they're there yet.”
ML: “Yeah.”
RM: “So I think that's our job. Our job is to take their bill, make it better, get it back to them, and hopefully we get it across the finish line.”
ML: “How do you think you guys could get to those cuts as opposed to how they are? Or do you think their mathematics are a little iffy?”
RM: “No, no. I think there's lots more opportunities in the fraud, waste of abuse, specifically, in Medicaid.”
ML: “Yeah.”
RM: “We need to do a better job of preserving Medicaid for those who need it the most. We need to strengthen it for those who need it the most. And I don't think they've really done everything they can to to protect it and to make it more — I guess the word I would use is to make it more of more efficient.”
ML: “Yeah?”
RM: “There's a lot of — there's a lot of things that are being done by states that would be, you know, considered money laundering were we to do it, and particularly the provider tax, I think there's some more work to be done on the provider taxes.”
ML: “Yeah?”
RM: “Okay?”
ML: “Yeah. Interesting. Thank you, sir.”
Content posted at AskaPol.com is copyrighted. Use our original content to move the story forward. And, please, link to us.
Share this post