Montana’s Bitcoin Bill Bites the Dust: What Happened to the Digital Gold Rush?

  • Montana’s Bitcoin reserve bill met its untimely demise in a 41-59 House vote, leaving it gasping for breath.
  • Meanwhile, twenty other U.S. states are galloping ahead with their own Bitcoin reserve legislation, blissfully ignoring Montana’s cautionary tale.

In a world where Bitcoin [BTC] is the new gold and lawmakers are the reluctant miners, Montana has stumbled upon a rather large rock in the road. Inspired by the illustrious vision of Donald Trump, who apparently dreams of a national ‘Strategic Bitcoin Reserve’ while sipping his morning coffee, Montana’s House Bill No. 429 aimed to create a shiny new revenue account for investing in precious metals, stablecoins, and other digital assets that sound like they belong in a sci-fi novel.

Alas, despite BTC being the only asset that met the bill’s rather lofty $750 billion market cap requirement, the proposal was unceremoniously tossed out in a 41-59 vote. It seems several Republicans decided that the idea of investing in something that sounds like it could explode at any moment was a bit too adventurous for their taste.

Why did the Montana lawmakers reject the Bitcoin Reserve bill?

State Representative Steven Kelly, during a riveting session on the House Floor on the 22nd of February, declared,

“It’s still taxpayer money, and we’re responsible for it, and we need to protect it.”

He then added, with the gravitas of a man who has just discovered that his favorite chair is actually a whoopee cushion,

“These types of investments are way too risky.”

For those who might have been napping during the proceedings, an amendment proposing to fund the bill using interest from the American Rescue Plan Act was introduced but, much like a cat at bath time, failed to gain any traction.

While a majority of Republicans were on board, with 40 voting in favor, 18 opposed it—joining the unanimous resistance from Democrats. It was a classic case of “let’s not do anything too exciting today.”

Other execs share similar sentiments

However, Representative Lee Demming, ever the optimist, insisted that the bill was all about securing better returns on taxpayer funds. Speaking during the House Floor session, he argued that if the state was going to hold onto taxpayer money, it had a duty to make it work harder than a cat chasing a laser pointer.

Explaining his support for the bill, Demming added,

“If we’re going to keep the taxpayer’s money, I think we owe it to the taxpayers to get as high a return on that money that’s sitting in there, either that or you give it right back to them, so I’m going to vote on this bill for that reason.”

Meanwhile, Representative Bill Mercer expressed his concerns about giving Montana’s Board of Investments the power to dabble in cryptocurrencies and NFTs, saying,

“I did not come here to do that.”

Another lawmaker chimed in,

“This smacks of speculation to me.”

Thus, despite some lawmakers recognizing the potential of House Bill No. 429, the calls for further amendments were about as effective as trying to teach a goldfish to fetch.

Montana’s recent move contradicts other states’ approach

The bill, which had previously sailed through Montana’s business and labor committee with full Republican support, ultimately floundered in the House, effectively ending its prospects for now. To reintroduce a Bitcoin reserve initiative, fresh legislation would need to be proposed in future sessions, which is about as likely as finding a unicorn in a cornfield.

Meanwhile, 24 states across the U.S. are pursuing similar legislation, with 20 bills still active in states like Arizona, Texas, and Ohio. Montana now joins the ranks of Wyoming, North Dakota, and Pennsylvania as one of the few states to reject such proposals, while other states, including Utah and Arizona, are pushing their bills forward for Senate debate, likely with a side of popcorn.

Read More

2025-02-25 02:20