The House Financial Services Committee Passes CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act
The House Financial Services Committee (HFSC) has approved the CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act, introduced by Congressman Tom Emmer. The legislation aims to prevent the Federal Reserve from issuing a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) to individuals, with Emmer referring to CBDCs as “financial surveillance tools.” The bill also prohibits the use of CBDCs in conducting monetary policy. However, it does not impact private market stablecoins like USDC and USDT.
Partisan Divide Over the Bill
The support for the bill was divided along partisan lines. While it garnered 60 Republican co-sponsors, not a single Democrat on the Committee voted in favor of advancing the legislation, with 20 voting against it. Representative Brad Sherman criticized proponents of the bill for favoring privately controlled cryptocurrencies over central bank-issued ones. Democrat Rep. Maxine Waters argued that not implementing a CBDC could result in the dollar losing its status as the world’s reserve currency and hinder faster, cheaper, and simpler payments for U.S. citizens.
Accusations and Prior Legislation
House Financial Services Committee Chair Patrick McHenry accused Democrats, including Waters, of being influenced by the White House in blocking previous stablecoin legislation. Democrats opposed the Clarity for Payment Stablecoins Act of 2023, which aimed to establish a regulatory framework for private stablecoins. They viewed the bill as too favorable to the crypto industry.
Hot Take: Protecting Privacy or Hindering Innovation?
The passage of the CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act reflects concerns about potential privacy infringements posed by central bank-issued digital currencies. Proponents argue that such currencies could enable governments to monitor citizens’ financial activities. However, critics, particularly Democrats, contend that rejecting CBDCs may impede technological innovation and hinder the U.S.’s ability to compete with countries like China. The debate highlights the ongoing tension between privacy and innovation in the crypto space.
By
By
By
By
By