WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.280 --> 00:00:15.060
Could Arizona be the first US state to pass a strategic Bitcoin reserve? It sure looks like it. Arizona jumps into first and second place in the race to get an SBR bill out and on the governor's desk. We talk about it.

2
00:00:15.080 --> 00:00:23.740
We talk about all the states, where they are, and how the race is heating up this May. Bitcoin Season Two is brought to you by Arch Network, the platform building bridgeless apps on Bitcoin.

3
00:00:24.100 --> 00:00:35.680
More on Arch later on the show. Let's kick it off. [upbeat music] Arizona jumps into first place.

4
00:00:35.780 --> 00:00:42.460
The checkered flag has been waved, Colin, and Arizona screams past on the final lap.

5
00:00:42.680 --> 00:00:55.940
Arizona passes two bills, and all they have to do is be signed by the governor, and then Arizona can hold and buy Bitcoin and other digital assets. We are actually... It's, it's gonna happen by this point.

6
00:00:55.980 --> 00:01:00.580
It's actually gonna happen. Do you think so? There's not gonna be a veto by Arizona's governor?

7
00:01:01.060 --> 00:01:08.980
Well, I mean- This is something you wrote about in, um, the newsletter for this week, was that it's not a guarantee because to get that signature would mean

8
00:01:10.100 --> 00:01:20.950
the Democratic governor of Arizona would have to side with an expressively conservative bill. I mean, it doesn't have to be, but at this point- When I say it's gon-...

9
00:01:20.950 --> 00:01:32.060
Bitcoin is pretty right-coded by, according to a lot of people, you know? When I say it's gonna happen, I'm talking about, like, we've got now multiple states, like, closing in on the finish line, the final lap.

10
00:01:32.120 --> 00:01:40.060
So, like, you've got to think that one of these is gonna work. And for the listener who's not in the weeds, Colin and I will explain.

11
00:01:40.140 --> 00:01:56.920
We'll explain what the current, uh, lineup is, who is in the lead, and explain some of the details around why, um, a state, say like Texas, has three simultaneous strategic Bitcoin reserve bills currently going through and why Arizona is currently in the lead.

12
00:01:57.380 --> 00:02:12.900
As we record this on Thursday, May 1st, we have in the final vote in the, uh, I believe, House of New Hampshire, another SBR, which, uh, is favorable to pass.

13
00:02:13.400 --> 00:02:26.430
So, like, we are now gonna possibly get multiple of these bills on governors' desks this May to see if they'll sign or not. Colin, how do you want to start breaking this down for the listener?

14
00:02:27.040 --> 00:02:37.340
Yeah, so I think that let's just hop into where the current landscape stands. And just a, a quick correction for the New Hampshire bill. It will be...

15
00:02:37.360 --> 00:02:48.740
It passed in committee in the Senate, and it'll be put to a vote in the Senate because it's a House bill, so it originated there. And I don't know whether or not people are hopeful this one will pass.

16
00:02:49.300 --> 00:03:01.440
Doesn't seem like there is too much opposition to it. But perhaps to start, we could just pull up this nifty little tracker from our friends at Bitcoin Laws. Shout out to the guys building that.

17
00:03:01.980 --> 00:03:06.000
And we will take a look at where the current race stands.

18
00:03:06.040 --> 00:03:20.200
So as Charlie mentioned, Arizona in first and second place with two bills that originated in the Senate that passed via the House most recently, and now all they have to get is a signature from the governor.

19
00:03:20.500 --> 00:03:24.960
One of these probably w-will die, the other one will take its place. At least I think.

20
00:03:25.000 --> 00:03:33.530
Someone could probably correct me who's more informed on political matters, but it seems kind of redundant to have two of these bills exist. Well- But they're... Go ahead.

21
00:03:33.540 --> 00:03:44.580
I can, I can actually, if we want to, I can explain the, the distinguishing between these two bills in Arizona. So- I think that's important because there's, there are a few differences between them.

22
00:03:45.380 --> 00:03:50.260
The most interesting thing to me, though, is that it allows for a pretty aggressive allocation to Bitcoin.

23
00:03:50.300 --> 00:04:00.020
It's on the higher end in terms of what states are proposing for their strategic Bitcoin reserve in terms of total percentage of public funding for something like this. Yeah.

24
00:04:00.470 --> 00:04:05.940
A general observation is, like, most of the language of most of these bills is actually pretty gracious.

25
00:04:05.980 --> 00:04:16.720
Like, um, we, we see a common, like, denomination of an up, up to ten percent of, like, various large, like, components of treasuries.

26
00:04:17.280 --> 00:04:25.240
So it's really interesting because you see BlackRock, you see Larry Fink saying, um, "You should probably have, like, one to two percent of your portfolio allocated towards Bitcoin."

27
00:04:25.260 --> 00:04:39.380
And yet we see the most conservative, uh, capital allocators, the states themselves, governments, like, put a... possibly be looking to, like, put a, a head limit on t- of, like, you know, a-around ten percent.

28
00:04:39.440 --> 00:04:44.400
Okay, so Arizona, we have two bills, and it's actually pretty simple to make this analogy.

29
00:04:44.480 --> 00:04:57.720
Just like in the, at the national level, you have the strategic stockpile, which is what the executive order that Trump signed, which prevented the, uh, US government from selling any seized assets.

30
00:04:58.600 --> 00:05:02.400
That is what one of the Az- Arizona bills, uh, would accomplish.

31
00:05:02.520 --> 00:05:24.600
Basically, it says y-the seized, uh, assets or confiscated assets, digital assets, um, those can be put into a special fund which, uh, you know, is allocated as more of an investment, versus the active strategy, which you might compare to the Cynthia Lummis bill, which would be, we're going to, um, buy...

32
00:05:24.640 --> 00:05:34.100
we're going to allow the state to buy Bitcoin, similar to how Cynthia Lummis and her bill would allow the US government to actively buy and acquire Bitcoin.

33
00:05:34.180 --> 00:05:44.760
So those are the two bills that both passed in Arizona this past week, um, and they both passed, like, um, not by really a narrow margin, but, you know, a decent margin.

34
00:05:44.790 --> 00:05:57.860
And in the case of one of them, uh, [clears throat] this was Senate Bill one zero two five. Uh, it passed thirty-one to twenty-five with four not voting.

35
00:05:58.480 --> 00:06:10.152
You know, if we go back to our how a bill becomes a law-Um, like little cartoon, you know, demonstration that you would watch back in middle school. Schoolhouse Rock. Bitcoin edition. Yeah.

36
00:06:10.292 --> 00:06:18.412
So the bill, they argue about it, goes through a process, but then it's gotta be signed, and this is the one as you did push back.

37
00:06:19.172 --> 00:06:36.152
Arizona's a little unique because there is, uh, tension, really not just tension, it's just basically a brawl, a big between, uh, the governor and the, the Democratic governor and the largely Republican-denominated legislature.

38
00:06:36.832 --> 00:06:53.331
As I'm not super in the weeds, I understand she could just veto one or both of these bills and... or just not sign them. And, uh, that's kind of... But, but that's all that stands in between these being enacted.

39
00:06:53.832 --> 00:07:04.772
Katie Hobbs is the governor of Arizona, and she's a member of the Democratic Party. TBD whether or not she actually wants to veto this. I mean, it's pretty,

40
00:07:05.952 --> 00:07:13.712
it's pretty rare that a governor will out or a president will outright veto a bill if it's passed both chambers, right? Yeah. Uh, but it could happen.

41
00:07:14.412 --> 00:07:20.852
I wanna revert back to some of the distinguishing factors between these two, to your point, Charlie, 'cause I think this is really interesting.

42
00:07:21.572 --> 00:07:29.872
Uh, both of the Arizona bills allow for up to ten percent allocation in Bitcoin secured in a custodian or through an exchange-traded product.

43
00:07:29.912 --> 00:07:37.472
But they, both of them, as far as I can tell from reading the description, have kind of two key differentiators that are unique to both.

44
00:07:37.952 --> 00:08:03.632
So for the one, like you said, it allows for seized Bitcoin and civil asset forfeiture, things of that nature, to be subsumed within that reserve, but also includes that ten percent, uh, stipulation where, uh, it says here, um, the state treasurer is limited to investing no more than ten percent of the fund's total monies in any fiscal year and may loan digital assets to generate additional returns if no financial risks are increased.

45
00:08:04.252 --> 00:08:13.172
This is another interesting thing. A lot of these bills include clauses where the treasurer can actually use these bitcoins for yield, whatever that may be.

46
00:08:13.232 --> 00:08:26.732
They can lend them out into the private market or however else they're going to, uh, generate yield from that. The sec- the other one, so that is Senate Bill, uh, one three seven three in Arizona.

47
00:08:26.792 --> 00:08:42.412
The other one, Senate Bill one zero two five, includes that ten percent stipulation. Let me see. And I'm trying to see if it has... It doesn't have a clause for, uh, lending the Bitcoin out.

48
00:08:43.312 --> 00:08:57.452
But one of the things that I do find interesting is it stipulates that if the federal government passes a similar reserve, then Arizona may be allow-- or will be allowed to store their Bitcoin in the federal government via the Treasury.

49
00:08:57.892 --> 00:09:03.962
Oh, I missed that. Which like the anti-Federalist in me, you know, the ghost of Thomas Jefferson is looming over this conversation.

50
00:09:04.132 --> 00:09:12.912
I find that to be kind of interesting because, I mean, it makes sense from a de-risk, uh, from, from a, uh, de-risking the whole position standpoint.

51
00:09:13.452 --> 00:09:23.692
I mean, I would personally rather probably have a custodian who knows what they're doing to hold my funds like a professional, you know, maybe like a Bitwise or something like that, right? Or a Coinbase.

52
00:09:23.752 --> 00:09:31.572
But I find that clause interesting because to me, one of the benefits for the state as well is to have... I mean, if we're really game theorizing this, right?

53
00:09:31.612 --> 00:09:40.372
And looking at Bitcoin as a digital bearer asset that is highly inconfiscatable if you store it correctly, I don't know why you would give your keys to the king, right?

54
00:09:40.652 --> 00:09:51.732
And to me, it seems like you would be better suited as a state, especially in a highly polarized political environment, to hold your Bitcoin yourself rather than to relinquish the keys to the Treasury.

55
00:09:51.772 --> 00:10:02.352
But- Or, or j- or I mean, like, there's... This is also, uh, this is a sliding scale of, of counterparty trust assumptions. Like, um, sorry, Coinbase, I don't think it would...

56
00:10:02.392 --> 00:10:11.392
Like, we're talking about it might not make sense to put your Bitcoin alongside everyone else who's been custoding at Coinbase, the BlackRocks, the Microstrategies, everybody.

57
00:10:11.492 --> 00:10:17.232
Um, maybe you go for, uh, an AnchorWatch, who I had Rob on the show on, uh, a couple of months ago.

58
00:10:17.312 --> 00:10:32.032
But AnchorWatch, you know, it's-- you do, uh, it's an interesting signing scheme where you can, like, have incremental counterparty signers for things, and it's, uh, it's you have a little more control over how your stuff is custodian.

59
00:10:32.472 --> 00:10:40.652
But it's interesting because, like, I mean, these are, these are US states. Like, these are entities with lots of resources. Why don't they just do it themselves?

60
00:10:40.712 --> 00:10:48.672
Like, the whole purpose of these is to accomplish, like, states having a little bit, um, more autonomy.

61
00:10:48.752 --> 00:11:00.002
Like, uh, you know, for their other treasury assets, they tend to prefer to have certain lim- levels of control over those as well. Why wouldn't it also be with their Bitcoin?

62
00:11:00.072 --> 00:11:07.492
I do like this idea, though, Colin, you brought up that, you know, they can go pursue, you know, one of these bills have language that they can go to pursue, like, yield or something.

63
00:11:07.932 --> 00:11:26.422
I'm imagining, like, the state of Arizona, um, wrapping, like, their Bitcoin, uh, you know, put, you know, getting wrapped Bitcoin on, like, Eth and doing, like, DeFi lending shenanigans, uh, and maybe, like, blowing out the, uh, the APYs of some of these, uh, [chuckles]

64
00:11:26.772 --> 00:11:33.412
of some of these other DeFi protocols. [chuckles] Yeah, like wrapping their Bitcoin and then yield farming PP token. Exactly, yeah.

65
00:11:33.652 --> 00:11:50.552
And so eventually- Honestly, like, the Far- Fart Coin got blown out because the state of Arizona, uh, bought a bunch of the governance token with, uh, their state treasury and- Imagine how much the, the state of Arizona could fund all of their pension plans if they had just aped into Fart Coin a year or two ago.

66
00:11:50.632 --> 00:11:59.352
[upbeat music] Let me tell you about one of the most slept-on opportunities in crypto. Arch is building fast composable DeFi apps on Bitcoin.

67
00:11:59.872 --> 00:12:10.592
Arch apps tap into the OG blockchain with by far the most liquidity and best brand in crypto.I've known the team for over a year. The tech they're building is solid, and they are racing towards mainnet.

68
00:12:10.602 --> 00:12:22.052
There's DEXs like Saturn, meme coins on funkybit.fun, instant loans on Cha-Ching, and so much more. Plus, they're rewarding testnet users, so join me in trying out Arch while it's still early.

69
00:12:22.972 --> 00:12:33.012
G-going back to the custody thing, AnchorWatch is great, also insured by Lloyd's of London up to a certain point, depending on your plan.

70
00:12:33.092 --> 00:12:42.732
Obviously, something like that would be good, especially if it's a company that is, uh, uh, let's say, a little closer to the Bitcoin cyberpunk ethos or just generally kind of good actors.

71
00:12:42.832 --> 00:13:00.132
I do think when you're asking why do states not just do that themselves, I feel like governments are very keen to just offload any responsibility like this onto professionals in the private sector because it's either a combination of laziness or just kind of humility, saying, "This isn't really our domain.

72
00:13:00.592 --> 00:13:02.492
Why don't we just contract someone out for this?"

73
00:13:03.332 --> 00:13:13.352
But then there's the other scenario where they decide to not go with a custodian, and the treasurer of the State of Arizona is sleeping with a cold card under his mattress or something [chuckles] like that.

74
00:13:13.912 --> 00:13:24.592
Or you have some sort of... I'm imagining all of these hair-brained schemes where it's like you have maybe, like, four different representatives who memorize three words of a seed phrase each.

75
00:13:24.692 --> 00:13:36.172
[chuckles] That's called multi-party computations, MPC. We split the seed up. [chuckles] You know, um- Yeah A-anyway, all that being said, that... I think that's kind of an unanswered piece to this, or pr- an unexplored

76
00:13:37.252 --> 00:13:41.952
part of this, and an unknown until one of these passes. It will be really interesting, and I think you're right.

77
00:13:42.032 --> 00:13:54.552
We will get at least one bill that is enacted into law, and it will be fascinating to see which states decide to custody with certain custodians or which states decide to take self-custody.

78
00:13:55.112 --> 00:14:02.702
If the United States government ends up actually passing an active Bitcoin reserve, if they will decide to relinquish their keys to the Treasury for safekeeping.

79
00:14:03.392 --> 00:14:11.192
There are so many different ways that they could skin this cat, and I think it'll be interesting and really telling w- the ways in which they decide to go with it.

80
00:14:11.612 --> 00:14:25.992
You know, I would imagine that the un- a lot of custodians would probably be chomping at the bit for a government contract like this, maybe not from Arizona as much as, like, a Texas or a California that have massive GDPs, right?

81
00:14:26.052 --> 00:14:37.472
But business is business, right? So it's ripe for the spoils. Should we move on to- Yeah, let's, let's- Oh, go ahead. Yeah. Uh, yeah. We- let's we- let's move on. So, uh, we...

82
00:14:37.512 --> 00:14:54.552
Uh, just for the listener, for context, uh, this, uh, Bitcoin laws, uh, tracks, um, 40 bills of the, in the SBR class, 40 SBR-type bills having been filed, um, from US states over the past year.

83
00:14:54.662 --> 00:15:00.602
Some of these were filed last legislative session. Most are currently in the, like, current active legislative session.

84
00:15:01.412 --> 00:15:15.672
Of those 40 bills, six are dead, and, uh, multiple are, like, duplicates in the case of North Carolina, Ohio, uh, Montana, Missouri, Iowa, and Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Arizona.

85
00:15:16.292 --> 00:15:33.272
And in one case, there's three bills, and that's in Texas. We'll talk about that. Um, uh, which state do you wanna go to next, Colin? I think let's, like, give a quick overview, [clicks tongue] um, of the ones that are

86
00:15:34.412 --> 00:15:43.072
just neck and neck with Arizona. Yeah. So we already mentioned, and I'm gonna confirm this right now by looking on the website, the New Hampshire bill.

87
00:15:43.192 --> 00:16:00.492
Yes, the, it has, uh, the New Hampshire bill will be taken to the Senate floor today, so we should know probably within the day whether or not that one is going to pass both chambers and then go to the governor's desk for a signature.

88
00:16:01.172 --> 00:16:14.812
There's also the North Carolina bill, where it passed its first reading in the Senate, and now it has been referred to the Committee on Rules and Operations of the Senate, if I'm reading this correctly.

89
00:16:15.202 --> 00:16:24.872
[sighs] TBD when there will be an actual vote on that. I'm not totally certain what the legislative process is for North Carolina.

90
00:16:25.392 --> 00:16:43.552
But it passed its second reading in the House just yesterday, so I, I assume maybe if we, um, are looking at the House and the Senate of North Carolina having similar processes, and there's probably someone who's more legally informed than I am, who's like, "That's not how this works, but maybe it has to have two readings in the Senate."

91
00:16:44.172 --> 00:16:55.462
But needless to say, this one should have a resolution, or we should have more clarity on it sometime soon. And then let's move on to the Texas bill for what you were saying- Yeah...

92
00:16:55.482 --> 00:17:01.732
Charlie, 'cause this is the other one that is kind of neck and neck with Arizona.

93
00:17:01.812 --> 00:17:18.272
Outside of the Arizona bills, there's a North Carolina bill from the House, there's a New Hampshire bill, and there's a Texas bill from the Senate that, that are close in, in the sense of, if they pass their next reading and they end up getting voted in, then they will go to the governor's desk for a vote.

94
00:17:19.152 --> 00:17:26.972
And the Texas bill that we have currently here, and let me just read the update on it. Um, the last

95
00:17:28.732 --> 00:17:39.772
action item on the Texas, uh, website, on the, on the government of, uh, the Texas legislator website, is that it was left pending in committee on 4/23.

96
00:17:40.332 --> 00:17:54.792
It passed, um, its vote in the Senate, but it's sitting in committee, and I'm not totally sure whether or not it will advance to the second chamber. Um, that, that one's kind of up in the air.

97
00:17:54.852 --> 00:18:02.252
But Charlie, maybe you can give us a quick rundown on this bill- Yeah... because, as you said, there are three in Texas, and they're all pretty different.

98
00:18:02.832 --> 00:18:19.576
What's notable about this particular bill, which is the, uh, favored one for Texas-Uh, of the three is, I'll just first say that it's, uh, that the three sponsors... No, there's four sponsors of the bill.

99
00:18:20.356 --> 00:18:34.556
Um, Charles Schwett- Schwertner is the [chuckles] uh, the primary sponsor, and there's three co-sponsors, and it is bipartisan, so three Rs and one D, uh, sponsoring this, which is great.

100
00:18:34.616 --> 00:18:49.506
You do love to see some bipartisan, uh, support for these, which is usually a good sign, um, get- given that anything bipartisan, you know, seems incrementally more likely of being, of, uh, being successful.

101
00:18:49.616 --> 00:19:25.676
So, um, this Senate Bill, uh, 21, this particular bill is interesting because instead of, um, like saying you can allocate part, part of your treasury as many of the other bills and languages do, um, this bill actually creates, um, a whole new fund outside of the treasury with a lot more, uh, like powers, uh, and flexibility on the investment side, and it's controlled by the comptroller and a, uh,

102
00:19:26.616 --> 00:19:34.786
five-member, quote, expert advisory cr- uh, committee from reps in the private sec- private Bitcoin and crypto sector.

103
00:19:35.296 --> 00:19:46.616
So this is interesting because this allows Texas to kind of operate almost like a liquid fund, like a liquid venture fund, uh, in how it's structured, and it, um...

104
00:19:47.496 --> 00:19:54.076
So those of us who are in Bitcoin, like we go, "Oh, yeah, it's probably the more optimal way to do it, I guess."

105
00:19:54.456 --> 00:20:06.516
But at the same time, like this would represent a more active, active role as opposed to like, um, defensive role that I think the language has been positioning a lot of these state bills in.

106
00:20:07.136 --> 00:20:19.516
So this would be more like Texas gets to operate like Multicoin than, uh [chuckles] which is also lo- headquartered in Austin, Texas, by the way.

107
00:20:19.636 --> 00:20:31.656
Uh, and uh, more like Multicoin than, uh, an actual like strategic reserve. So that's a very in-interesting kind of like dimension of this, uh, Senate Bill 21 in Texas.

108
00:20:32.076 --> 00:20:44.616
Is that a contention with the provision that it ha- the cryptocurrency invested in it has to have a five hundred billion dollar market cap? I don't know. The, um,

109
00:20:45.856 --> 00:21:04.196
I can-- Some of the, I-- My head is swimming from trying to read through all these bills, but, um, the summary on Bitcoin laws does have Senate Bill 21 in Texas as the five hundred billion minimum market cap, which for the listener would mean that only Bitcoin qualifies to be invested in.

110
00:21:04.496 --> 00:21:12.116
It's an interesting provision because what that essentially does is it guarantees that you're only going to get the cream of the crop outright, right?

111
00:21:12.616 --> 00:21:19.396
But it opens up the potential in the future to invest in other crypto assets should they transcend that barrier.

112
00:21:19.516 --> 00:21:26.396
I think it's pretty smart and prudent, because what it's basically saying is we're going to do Bitcoin first, 'cause that's the only one that meets this requirement.

113
00:21:26.416 --> 00:21:39.836
It's the least risky of all of the cryptocurrencies, and if people are uncomfortable with some of those other ones, then if they end up passing that half a billion dollar market cap, then maybe the risk or the perceived risk is lowered in people's eyes.

114
00:21:40.776 --> 00:21:55.426
I, I think that's pretty judicious wording on the part of the legislators who draft this bill. Yeah, it's great because, you know, it's hard. These, these bills have to be like asset neutral. Um, Bitcoin-only bills,

115
00:21:56.516 --> 00:22:03.656
I've, as much as I love them, 'cause I'm a Bitcoiner, it's just the kind of thing like you have to have as neutral language as possible.

116
00:22:04.516 --> 00:22:17.996
Um, and, uh, the way you can get an effectively Bitcoin-only bill, and it actually demonstrates like a good like rule of thumb high watermark for these assets, they just have to be big enough.

117
00:22:18.006 --> 00:22:30.956
And it's also just generally good from a treasury standpoint. You don't want to be investing in illiquid small cap shitcoins. Um, it-- we don't want, as much as I joke about, we don't want Texas buying Farcoin.

118
00:22:31.636 --> 00:22:41.016
Um, we want them [chuckles] uh, buying Bitcoin, uh, so that, uh, us Bitcoiners can roll some of our profits into Farcoin. That's, that's the whole point.

119
00:22:41.396 --> 00:22:55.376
And the original bill that was proposed in Texas, I believe this was the first one or it was one of the first, was pretty underwhelming, um, when you consider the, uh, actual text of the bill.

120
00:22:55.586 --> 00:23:08.996
What it originally stated was that the government of Texas could accept donations in Bitcoin, and it would allow Texas to hold Bitcoin, effectively establishing a strategic Bitcoin reserve.

121
00:23:09.576 --> 00:23:14.936
But it didn't originally stipulate that the government could actually actively purchase Bitcoin.

122
00:23:14.976 --> 00:23:31.896
I believe it was amended later, and now I quote from Bitcoin laws, "The bill limits Bitcoin purchases to no more than one percent of the unencumbered general revenue fund balance per biennial cycle and requires the Comptroller to produce a biennial report detailing the reserve's total Bitcoin holdings."

123
00:23:31.916 --> 00:23:40.556
Now compare that again to the Arizona bill, which allows up to ten percent of the fund, m- uh, that is allocated towards buying Bitcoin.

124
00:23:40.876 --> 00:23:56.276
One percent, I mean, again, again, Texas versus Arizona, Texas has a much larger GDP, so maybe this is a larger slice of the pie, but it's still a much more conservative allocation when you factor in what percentage of the state budget is going towards something like Bitcoin.

125
00:23:56.996 --> 00:24:13.576
And we could probably go on and on for an entire other episode dissecting the differences between all of these. Yeah. But it's just funny considering Texas has been one of the lodestars of many a Bitcoin business, right?

126
00:24:13.676 --> 00:24:22.508
Whether that beUh, a company like Unchained, I believe they're headquartered in Austin or it's the- Yeah, a lot of people in Austin, a lot of miners in Austin, a lot of finance now- Yeah, Bitcoin miner.

127
00:24:22.608 --> 00:24:31.948
Like, like Texas is the heart of the Bitcoin mining industry in the US, and they have one of the more conservative bills. But that's not the one that's currently advancing through the Senate.

128
00:24:32.008 --> 00:24:43.708
Maybe that there's some signal there. Well, yeah, I mean, because Texas, uh, you know, my-- as I talk to Texans and people in the space, you know, you look at the Texas Blockchain Council, which has led

129
00:24:44.708 --> 00:24:54.748
pr-pretty much acted almost more like a national organization, national leader in the, uh, like advocacy for domestic embrasure of digital assets in the US.

130
00:24:55.428 --> 00:25:09.328
Like, uh, even then, even though Texas is kind of this titan in both industry and policy, uh, it's like the, the, the state is like not fully sold on it from a legislator standpoint.

131
00:25:09.408 --> 00:25:13.688
Like, um, I understand it's like still a lot of this is still pretty contentious.

132
00:25:14.148 --> 00:25:30.628
And you have issues like, you have simultaneously like a whole, a whole kind of challenge with Bitcoin miners, uh, both helping the grid and creating a lot of problems and getting a lot of pushback, um, in their respective judicial or in, uh, uh, districts.

133
00:25:30.848 --> 00:25:46.848
So, uh, the next one that we can talk about is the an interesting dynamic where we have Alabama here, who has two bills, identic- basically identical language, and each bill, one is starting in the House and one is starting in the Senate.

134
00:25:47.668 --> 00:26:02.568
So they're i- pretty much identical bills sponsored by two, well a senator and a house rep, and they start in one of the houses, and the strategy is to basically increase the likelihood that one or both of these would pass.

135
00:26:03.768 --> 00:26:14.628
Because, um, the way the process works, you start in one of the, um, uh, in one of e-either the House or Senate, then you go to the other.

136
00:26:14.818 --> 00:26:28.708
And so, um, sometimes if you just present more opportunities for people to vote and talk about it, it incre- it increases your hits, um, on target. So, uh, I was not aware that this is like a strategy.

137
00:26:28.808 --> 00:26:43.228
Maybe this is common in [chuckles] like in, uh, government and bureaucracy. Uh, this seems, again, kind of hilarious and inefficient. But you see this, this, uh, meta emerge in Alabama.

138
00:26:43.328 --> 00:26:56.568
Both of these are in, um, committee for House and Senate in their respective, uh, sides of the legislature. Yeah, and a lot of bills currently in committee, so I think that there will be,

139
00:26:57.848 --> 00:27:07.318
uh, many fruits for discussion over the next few months as some of these advance or get killed. Charlie, maybe we can close on some of the ones that have failed. Yeah.

140
00:27:07.318 --> 00:27:20.448
We can focus specifically on one from your home state, the beautiful Oklahoma. Yeah. And then also touch on Pennsylvania to show kind of two different ways in which some of these bills are getting struck down. Yeah.

141
00:27:20.508 --> 00:27:32.608
So, uh, I can offer a look behind the curtain. I think we-- I talked a bit, a bit about it, um, on previous episodes of Bitcoin Season two. [clears throat] But, uh, I'm in Oklahoma.

142
00:27:32.668 --> 00:27:40.898
I'm on the board of the Oklahoma Bitcoin Association, and we were pushing the SBR in Oklahoma, and it looked like a lot of these.

143
00:27:40.948 --> 00:27:50.288
It was, uh, just take some of the state treasury, uh, put into an asset, uh, like Bitcoin, gotta be over five hundred billion. And, uh,

144
00:27:51.288 --> 00:28:02.628
and, um, you know, some language about like what you can do, what, you know, what, what stable coins are okay to touch, that kind of thing. Well, the bill passed overwhelmingly in the House,

145
00:28:03.688 --> 00:28:11.068
and then it went, uh, then it was going on to the Senate. And [clears throat] before it goes to the Senate, it's got to go to a Senate committee.

146
00:28:11.428 --> 00:28:22.098
In this case, it went to the Revenue and Taxation Committee in the Senate, where the chair of that committee is also head of the Senate. Uh, uh, he's, uh, works, you know, for, for banks.

147
00:28:23.137 --> 00:28:35.768
And, um, members of the Oklahoma Bitcoin Association had done a lot of legwork talking to all the members of this committee, explaining how it worked, talking to them, getting, uh, you know, a feel for what we thought the vote might go.

148
00:28:36.348 --> 00:28:45.858
Um, our lobbyists are talking to them. We all felt pretty confident about it, which is great because, like, um, w-we were, you know, a little uncertain.

149
00:28:45.928 --> 00:28:56.688
We were kind of maybe fifty percent that it would actually pass a Senate vote. But as it was going through committee and as more states around the US start adding these bills, um, we began to feel more confident.

150
00:28:57.048 --> 00:29:03.348
So the week of that it was in committee, uh, we were pretty confident that it actually passed committee, uh, overwhelmingly.

151
00:29:04.308 --> 00:29:12.498
But, um, as it would happen, that same week, even though we had touched base with, uh, many of the members of this committee,

152
00:29:13.988 --> 00:29:24.828
you had, uh, other senators in these, uh, other senators like hold special meetings advocating against this specific bill.

153
00:29:25.648 --> 00:29:39.588
The, uh, the language was that this is very similar to the, um, the tech, the internet boom of the 2000s. This is kind of like, uh, you know, again, it's a bubble.

154
00:29:40.328 --> 00:29:50.248
It's the same kind of arguments you've, you've heard a million times before. And, uh, they-- and so, uh, we had several yeses switch to nos.

155
00:29:50.828 --> 00:29:56.868
What's interesting, um, and, and the, and the bill failed in committee six to five, unfortunately.

156
00:29:57.308 --> 00:30:07.178
What's funny is we actually had a no switch to yes, um, because, uh, somebody from like our lo- one of our local meetups called their senator and was like, "Hey, you're, you're in committee for this."

157
00:30:07.718 --> 00:30:11.098
[laughs] And so they actually switched, [chuckles] a single call, switched a no from yes.

158
00:30:11.108 --> 00:30:20.688
So it actually would have been seven to five, um, because there was such coordinated campaigning against this, and we were not aware of it just 'cause it kinda happened.

159
00:30:20.708 --> 00:30:32.896
I mean-You don't know what you don't know, and it's like so much work to stay, like, to see, to like follow every single meeting and every single conversation that's happening. And this is the kind of like dynamic.

160
00:30:32.936 --> 00:30:42.276
This is the-- what it looks like from a tactical view of like how these, uh, bills go and get into law.

161
00:30:42.406 --> 00:30:54.456
So it's not like, um, everyone is on Twitter, and they browse through and they go, "Oh, look, Dennis Porter is retweeting, uh, that, um, Arizona's about to buy Bitcoin. That seems like a great idea."

162
00:30:54.576 --> 00:31:02.996
No, they don't evaluate the actual... There's not a whole lot of like real evaluation of the language of these bills. Uh, it's really just how they feel about it.

163
00:31:03.256 --> 00:31:12.036
It-- this is quite frankly, it's just how they feel about it. It's about vibe, and it's about, um, does it augment their chances for re-election next year?

164
00:31:12.396 --> 00:31:24.076
Vibe voting, and it's a good example again of the ways in which senators and Congress members, both on the federal and state level, are pulled in so many different directions.

165
00:31:24.696 --> 00:31:30.176
It's like they're being quartered every day by different political interests and business interests.

166
00:31:30.186 --> 00:31:44.136
The fact of the matter is their staffers end up doing most of the legwork to figure out the details of specific bills or policy and lobbying rules, how they view that, and lobbyists are always at their ear.

167
00:31:44.176 --> 00:31:57.196
And so all of these bills obviously have had many champions and many detractors. And sometimes, as with the Oklahoma bill, the chips don't fall in the favor of those who would like to see a strategic Bitcoin reserve.

168
00:31:57.256 --> 00:32:08.656
And the Oklahoma one is a good example of one that failed in committee, was-- p-people were pretty hopeful about it, as, as were you, Charlie, and obviously it's not going to materialize now.

169
00:32:09.116 --> 00:32:17.576
There's another one, and we'll close on this because it shows kind of the opposite end of the spectrum of, you know, a baby that was, you know, smothered in the cradle, so to speak.

170
00:32:17.736 --> 00:32:25.876
[laughs] You know, there was a bill from Pennsylvania that was, I believe, one of the first ones for a strategic Bitcoin reserve to be introduced.

171
00:32:26.256 --> 00:32:33.656
It was introduced by one Michael Cable last year right before the election, I think in October. And it was a good bill. It was a good bill.

172
00:32:33.736 --> 00:32:42.656
It would have allowed for investing up to ten percent, ten percent of key state funds, including the general fund, budget stabilization fund and others under the treasurer.

173
00:32:43.056 --> 00:32:57.446
But, uh, Representative Cable did not get reelected, and if you sponsor a bill and you don't get reelected, your bill is done, and that one was shoved to the wayside pretty quickly after he lost his seat last election.

174
00:32:57.986 --> 00:33:00.716
Many ways for these to fail, few ways for them to succeed.

175
00:33:01.096 --> 00:33:11.296
So I-- just needless to say, should we get one of these or a few of them, I think it'll be a massive win for those who have been pushing for these bills because it's really hard to get something like this passed.

176
00:33:11.356 --> 00:33:20.456
I mean, most of these states are worried about employment, cost of living, a host of other issues that were front and center during the election cycle last year.

177
00:33:20.976 --> 00:33:28.276
Honestly, Bitcoin is probably the last thing on their mind, and the fact that these have advanced to the state that they have is pretty impressive in its own right. Yep.

178
00:33:28.576 --> 00:33:31.336
Um, [clears throat] but as we know in Bitcoin, things happen really fast.

179
00:33:31.456 --> 00:33:47.306
So, um, I will be doing a little informal tracking of how much the state of Oklahoma would have made or lost on, um, a, what an expected, uh, uh, investment size would be. So I'll be doing this quarterly.

180
00:33:47.896 --> 00:34:17.306
I'll be making sure to tag the relevant, uh, senators and, uh, people who, uh, voted for and against it just so they can get updates, because sure would, you know, be nice to be able to have some actual real back testing data next legis- next legislative session, um, in twenty twenty-six, when we represent perhaps a similar SBR type bill with, um, updated language for the modern era of next year.

181
00:34:17.636 --> 00:34:30.496
You've heard of the Oracle of Omaha, but you've not heard of the Oracle of Oklahoma, and he is going to keep tabs and receipts on all of the money that Oklahoma could have won or lost. [clears throat] Yep.

182
00:34:30.616 --> 00:34:39.355
So anyway, that's, that is the States. If you're listening to this, we write about this topic a lot. We cover the SBR story.

183
00:34:39.816 --> 00:34:52.936
We cover how, uh, the US, uh, important like beats in Bitcoin and crypto in the US, um, in our newsletter. So make sure to check out, uh, blockspace.media for more deep dives on our newsletter.

184
00:34:53.536 --> 00:35:06.166
And other than that, Paul and I will see you all next week for Writer's Room. Uh, uh, w- I don't know what we're gonna talk about, but you, if you have an opinion- Oh, we know what we're gonna talk about. Oh, yeah.

185
00:35:06.166 --> 00:35:17.896
Little teaser. There is blood in the streets. We are currently staring down another developer war in Bitcoin. Oh. Some people wanna r- increase the op return limit. If you don't know what that is, don't worry.

186
00:35:17.976 --> 00:35:30.696
We will cover what it is next week, why some people love it, why others fear it, and will Bitcoin fork from this? Probably not, but for the sake of the episode, almost certainly. [laughs] Yeah.

187
00:35:30.856 --> 00:35:48.786
So, uh, come, we'll explain the boogeyman, uh, next week, and see you all later. [outro music]