Fox Business Correspondent Eleanor Terrett posted that the U.S. House of Representatives could vote on Tuesday or Wednesday to overturn Biden's veto power over SAB 121, which would require a two-thirds majority. While overturning SAB 121's two-thirds majority is a big ask (about 60 more'yes' votes than were needed last time), members of Congress planning to vote'no 'should keep in mind that SAB 121 is an important reason for the limited number of institutions offering digital asset custody services, a risk VanEck outlined in its spot ETH S-1 filing. VanEck said that Coinbase, as a custodian of all spot ETF products (and most BTC products), is at risk: Coinbase provides ETH custodian services for multiple competing Ethereum exchange-traded products, which could adversely affect the trust's operations and ultimately the value of the stock. If banks and other'institutionally capable providers' are discouraged from providing custodian services due to SAB 121, does that mean that Biden and members of Congress who voted to keep the bill directly contributed to this market risk?