I became your enemy because I tell you the truth
“You can fool some of the people all the time and all the people some of the time,
but you can’t fool all the people all the time.” A. Lincoln
More legislators in the United States are introducing bills that if passed would prevent the implementation of a Federal Reserve digital dollar and central bank digital currency (CBDC).
Last month House Majority Whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota (R), along with a smattering of other cosponsors, introduced a bill that would ban the implementation of a CBDC, called The CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act.
Any digital version of the dollar must uphold our American values of privacy, individual sovereignty and free market competitiveness. Anything less opens the door to the development of a dangerous surveillance tool.
After all, America remains a technological leader not because we force innovations to adopt our values under regulatory duress, but because we allow technology that holds these.
Emmer said in a statement
Now more recently Senator Ted Cruz of Texas (R), joined by Senators Mike Braun of Indiana (R) and Chuck Grassley of Iowa (R), has also introduced a bill to ban the use and implementation of a CBDC by the Feds.
‘Not only would this CBDC model centralize Americans’ financial information, leaving it vulnerable to attack, it could be used as direct surveillance tool into the private transactions of Americans,’ Cruz explained on his website.
In an additional statement he said,
The federal government has no authority to unilaterally establish a central bank currency. This bill goes a long way in making sure big government doesn’t attempt to centralize or control cryptocurrency and instead, allows it to thrive in the United States. We should be empowering entrepreneurs, enabling innovation, and increasing individual freedom—not stifling it.
Senator Braun also stated:
Allowing the government to centralize Americans’ financial information and increase surveillance of Americans’ financial activity is simply a bad idea. The federal government should not have even more control over your own money. I support this legislation to allow entrepreneurship to prosper and keep the federal government from further encroaching on your privacy rights.
Cruz’s proposal, along with the same original cosponsors, first introduced this bill almost one year ago to date, but Cruz has now reintroduced it with some modifications to it.
Last week amidst widespread and continued banking fears and bank runs, the Federal Reserve announced the launch of their instant payment system called FedNow, which is expected to be released this July, which will ultimately be used to launch a CBDC in the future.
SEE: Red Alert: Federal Reserve Set To Launch “FedNow” Digital Payment System To Usher In CBDC
Other American politicians are taking stances against CBDCs and cryptocurrencies, such as South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R), who is looking to outright ban all cryptocurrencies as legal currency; and others like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis have in recent times blasted CBDCs, claiming that the state will be CBDC-free .
I have returned HB 1193 with my VETO.
The bill adopts a definition of “money” to specifically exclude cryptocurrencies. But these revisions do include Central Bank Digital Currencies as money.
These developments concern me for several reasons, which are found in this letter.
Noem wrote on Twitter
However, some of these actions might have bigger ramifications concerning cryptocurrencies and American tender on the backend, as explained by Bitcoin Magazine.
The magazine wrote:
But, in a recent article written for the Bitcoin Policy Institute titled “In Attempt to Stop CBDCs, States Are Rejecting Seemingly Pro-Bitcoin Legislation,” Yaël Ossowski described how the House Bill 1193 blocked by Gov. Noem would actually have been a benefit for bitcoin, not a net negative. In his opinion, the response to House Bill 1193 did not consider the full respects of the changes to the Uniform Commercial Code, and he cautions politicians that they should be careful to not block bills that could potentially benefit bitcoin.
The bill in question — based on an update to the Uniform Commercial Code — not only expands definitions and protections for Bitcoin, but actually creates a legal mechanism for recognizing self-custody and for the protocol’s inclusion in traditional lending, insurance, and commercial transactions.
To have CBDC-bashing as the latest litmus test for conservative politicians is indeed revolutionary, and from the point of view of individual and economic freedom that Bitcoin provides, is a positive phenomenon. But why is the battle being played out in rudimentary state commercial codes that have nothing to do with Central Bank Digital Currencies?
He writes
Ossowski described how, for conservatives, this bill represents “a backdoor for a CBDC and for eventual federal government control of economic freedom.” Because it gives a precise definition of money that excludes Bitcoin, it is assumed that a CBDC is what the government will qualify as money. This, however, is not necessarily a given, and the leaving out of bitcoin within that definition is actually a positive, according to Ossowski.
Not being defined as money means that Bitcoin transactions are not recognized as money transmission, which would otherwise require various licenses, permissions, and legal registrations.
Overall, that keeps the Bitcoin protocol outside the regulatory scope of restrictive rules that apply to legal tender like the US dollar.
He wrote
Ossowski also cites the “Catawba Digital Economic Zone, a self-dubbed Web3 special economic zone enabled by laws of the Catawba Indian Nation of the Carolinas.” In August of 2022 it became the first quasi-jurisdiction to adopt Article 12 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
They estimate that this bill gives them better legal footing for bitcoin, not worse.
Unlike previous attempts to integrate digital assets under existing law, the amendments define them directly within the UCC. This provides greater certainty, simplicity, and uniformity. The Amendments as approved on July 15th also address all the major concerns with other associated attempts, including the issues of security control, perfection, priority, and custodianship. The Amendments are forward looking, and technology neutral. — “Catawba Digital Economic Zone Approves Uniform Law Commission’s Digital Asset Amendments to the Uniform Commercial Code”
Ossowski does conclude, though, that it is understandable why Gov. Noem vetoed the bill.
While her understanding of the bill was flawed, her instincts were correct. The same applies to DeSantis’ mission to snipe CBDCs before they ever reach Florida’s shores.
He recommends that state lawmakers who grasp Article 12’s benefits for Bitcoin, and who desire to politically pronounce their opposition to CBDCs, should simply write that statement within their version of the bill.
Pushed to this political juncture, we can’t fault governors and legislators for wanting to plant an anti-CBDC flag. We should remind them, however, that technical updates to commercial legal codes that would benefit Bitcoin are desirable and necessary.
Ideally, states would adopt a more sound model policy that would help advance the cause of decentralized digital cash in the form of Bitcoin while forever keeping CBDCs off the table. But our work has only begun.
He wrote
AUTHOR COMMENTARY
While I am not pro-Bitcoin and a cheerleader for it, I agree with what Ossowski said: “To have CBDC-bashing as the latest litmus test for conservative politicians is indeed revolutionary;” and that Noem’s bill represents “a backdoor for a CBDC and for eventual federal government control of economic freedom.”
I find it strange that Cruz and company already had a proposal to ban CBDCs a year ago, went nowhere, then another anti-CBDC bill is introduced, and then Cruz reintroduces his.
To me, this looks like a dog & pony and show & tell act for the masses to think that these politicians are against CBDC’s, but they really are not. Why have none of them rebuked the recent announcement by the Fed and their FedNow system?
Even if some of these bills get passed, it really won’t matter because they’ll become defunct anyways once the Fed starts to assert their authority. Moreover, especially when the economy is finally allowed to fail – the debt market implodes, the banks collapse, and much more – and people are left begging for bread and are desperate for help, the government and the people will capitulate to accepting a Fed-led CBDC, along with a digital ID and social credit score.
All it takes for Evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing
https://winepressnews.com/2023/03/24/senator-ted-cruz-and-other-legislators-introduce-bill-to-prevent-the-creation-of-american-cbdc-but-there-maybe-a-catch-involved/
Michael Loyman