When the Senate Smiled, the House Frowned
In a plot twist worthy of a political thriller, North Dakota’s Senate gave the digital currency regulation bill, ND 2100, a thumbs-up only to watch it crash and burn in the House of Representatives with a staggering 84 out of 94 votes against it. Talk about a heartbreak!
The Bill That Wasn’t Quite Ready for Primetime
Not so fast! This bill had all the charm of a poorly-written sitcom. It attempted to tackle the “control of online currencies” but failed to clarify what that actually means. Ciphering through the legal mumbo jumbo reminds one of deciphering ancient hieroglyphs without a Rosetta Stone. Seriously, who wrote this?
State Compliance or a Case of License to Ill?
Aaron Webb from the state Department of Financial Institutions indicated businesses dealing with virtual currencies would require licensing. But let’s face it, in a state where the folks aren’t exactly trading crypto over coffee at the local café, one must wonder if regulation is more of a laugh than a law.
Comparative Analysis: State of Mind Across America
Nebulous North Dakota may have stumbled, but other states are dancing with virtual currency regulations. Let’s check out a couple:
- Illinois: This state has been cozying up to the crypto market, unlike our frenemy North Dakota.
- Hawaii: A state so sunny yet so conflicted, Hawaii is looking into the potential benefits of Blockchain but simultaneously telling Coinbase to take a hike.
- Washington: Similar to an angry guest at a party, Bitfinex dropped a bombshell this week, urging users to withdraw their funds after refusing to apply for a money transmitter license.
Why Does This Matter?
The fate of ND 2100 isn’t just about North Dakota. The friction between regulatory frameworks and innovations like cryptocurrency is creating tremors across the nation. As states grapple with what rules are reasonable, businesses and investors are left in a fog of uncertainty. Can’t someone just decide what’s cool?
+ There are no comments
Add yours