PR in the Philippines

During the 2024 elections, the cryptocurrency industry spent an unprecedented amount on campaign contributions, hoping to encourage Congress to enact legislation favorable to crypto. These efforts appear to have been largely successful, with many pro-crypto legislators now in Congress. Their initial focus? Regulating stablecoins. Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to maintain the value of a U.S. dollar. Supporters claim stablecoins help the U.S. maintain the dollar's global prominence, while allowing for more accessible, affordable, and secure global transactions. Stablecoin usage is rapidly increasing: its total value is approximately $235 billion, a significant increase from $152 billion a year prior. In March, President Trump stated his intention to sign stablecoin legislation by August. Congress has responded accordingly: both the House and Senate have recently moved stablecoin bills out of committee. Here’s a concise overview of stablecoins, the proposed legislation, and potential risks. What are stablecoins and who supports them? Stablecoins function similarly to bank deposits. Typically, an individual seeking stablecoins provides U.S. dollars to an issuing company, which then creates a stablecoin on a blockchain. The user can then use this stablecoin as a payment method worldwide, wherever it's accepted. Crypto traders favor stablecoins because their prices are more stable compared to assets like Bitcoin or Ethereum, leading to more predictable trading. Moreover, many individuals worldwide appreciate stablecoins because they retain value better than currencies in countries experiencing high inflation, such as Argentina and Turkey. In the U.S., stablecoin advocates span the political spectrum. On the right, political figures like House Majority Whip believe that stablecoins help preserve the dollar’s status as the world's reserve currency. A substantial number of eurodollars—unsecured dollars issued by foreign banks rather than the Federal Reserve—remain in global circulation. Stablecoins could meet this considerable demand, offering a safer and more easily transactable alternative. Additionally, since stablecoin issuers often back their stablecoins with U.S. Treasuries, increased stablecoin demand could alleviate the burden of the growing U.S. debt, proponents suggest. On the left, some Democrats believe stablecoins can promote financial inclusion and dismantle biased banking systems. New York Representative Ritchie Torres told TIME in September that he believed stablecoins could assist his constituents in his largely immigrant district in quickly sending money to the Caribbean and Latin America, while avoiding check-cashing fees or predatory lenders. "The ability to move a tokenized dollar at the speed of the blockchain has the potential to create a better, cheaper, and faster payment system for the lowest-income communities," he stated. Torres was among those who voted in favor of the STABLE Act, which advanced out of the House Financial Services Committee on April 2. What are the main stablecoins, and how is Trump now involved? The stablecoin market is currently dominated by two players: USDT (issued by Tether) and USDC (issued by Circle). Tether is very popular outside the U.S. but has been accused of making misleading claims about its reserves. Howard Lutnick, Trump’s new Commerce Secretary, previously had ties to the company. The bills under consideration in Congress could enable many other types of companies to issue their own stablecoins. Notably, the Trump family’s crypto company, World Liberty Financial, recently announced its own stablecoin. This is the latest of Trump’s crypto ventures, including an NFT collection and a meme coin. World Liberty’s stablecoin announcement was quickly criticized due to concerns that Trump would again have a direct financial stake in an industry he is supposed to regulate. California Democrat Maxine Waters, who has been working on stablecoin legislation, now firmly opposes any bill that would allow Trump to own a stablecoin. French Hill, a Republican from Arkansas and the House Financial Services Committee Chair, stated this week that Trump’s crypto initiatives have made drafting legislation “more complicated.” What kind of legislation is being considered? Both the House and Senate have advanced stablecoin bills—The STABLE Act and the GENIUS Act, respectively—out of their respective committees. The bills outline guidelines for regulating stablecoins, and the amount and types of reserves stablecoin issuers must maintain. The House and Senate will now have the chance to reconcile the two bills, aiming to get a unified bill to President Trump by the summer. If legislation is enacted, many financial institutions would likely seek to create their own stablecoins. Bank of America, for example, indicated it would launch a stablecoin once lawmakers legalize it. PayPal and Visa have also announced stablecoin initiatives. What are the main critiques of stablecoin legislation? There is strong bipartisan interest in a stablecoin bill in Washington. However, some lawmakers have expressed concerns. Elizabeth Warren, a prominent crypto skeptic in Congress, has argued that legitimizing stablecoins carries systemic risks, particularly vulnerability to bank runs. In 2022, the stablecoin UST collapsed when it lost its dollar peg and plummeted to zero. UST, however, was an algorithmic stablecoin, a type of currency that the STABLE Act prohibits from receiving federal approval for two years. “The bill lacks basic safeguards necessary to ensure that stablecoins don’t blow up our entire financial system,” Warren remarked at a hearing for the GENIUS Act in March. “Under this bill, stablecoin issuers can invest in risky assets, including the very assets that were bailed out in 2008.” Some critics also worry that the stablecoin bills, as currently drafted, could allow Big Tech companies like Meta and X to issue their own currencies, further consolidating corporate power. “If people think there’s a Big Tech surveillance state now, imagine what there would be when they have access to every piece of financial information about you,” says Arthur Wilmarth, a professor emeritus at George Washington University Law School. “There’s very little, if anything, in the bills that would give you protection.”

` tags. ` A stablecoin bill recently progressed in the House Financial Services Committee, suggesting that Congress may soon pass legislation solidifying stablecoins as important financial instruments. Supporters claim this will help the U.S. maintain the dollar's global prominence and facilitate cheaper, more secure transactions worldwide. Despite bipartisan support, the legislation faces opposition, particularly from Democrats worried about systemic risks and conflicts of interest, especially after the Trump family's crypto company announced plans for its own stablecoin. Critics also suggest that the legislation could allow Big Tech companies like Meta, X, and Amazon to create their own private currencies, increasing corporate power. Hilary Allen, a professor at American University Washington College of Law, notes that the bill's potential impact on large tech platforms is being overlooked. Both the House and Senate committees have passed stablecoin bills, outlining regulations and reserve requirements for stablecoin issuers. The House and Senate will now try to reconcile the two bills to send a unified bill to President Trump for approval this summer. Several banks, including , are interested in launching their own stablecoins if the law passes. However, the current versions of the bills would allow non-financial companies to create stablecoins through subsidiaries. Previous versions prohibited this, but neither the STABLE nor the GENIUS Act includes such a restriction. The STABLE Act even suggests that non-banks can issue stablecoins with federal regulator approval. Allen suggests this could allow figures like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg to create their own stablecoins. Both have shown interest in the payments sector, with Musk's X pursuing licenses in many states and Facebook attempting to launch its own cryptocurrency, Libra, in 2019 before facing pushback and regulatory scrutiny. Allen explains that Big Tech platforms are interested in payments because of the valuable data they can collect and monetize. As more transactions move to these platforms, these already significant players in society will become even more important in the financial system. Allen presents a scenario where Amazon issues stablecoins and promotes their use among employees, users, Whole Foods shoppers, and Washington Post subscribers. This could lead people to rely on stablecoins instead of bank accounts, which Allen argues is detrimental because banks loan out deposits, while stablecoin reserves remain idle. This would mean money that was previously used productively in the economy would simply be held by Amazon. Stephen Lynch, a Massachusetts Democrat, voiced similar concerns during the STABLE bill's markup, warning that stablecoins would compete with bank deposits and hinder banks' ability to lend to consumers and businesses. In October 2023, Rohit Chopra, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under President Biden, warned that Big Tech firms controlling banking operations would have a strong incentive to monitor consumer transactions and develop personalized pricing algorithms. Arthur Wilmarth, a professor emeritus at George Washington University Law School, says that stablecoin users would lack fraud protection. He also cites China, where Tencent and Alibaba's dominance in payments led to undue influence over regulators, prompting Beijing to intervene and gain control over their decisions. During the markup, Rep. Maxine Waters proposed an amendment to maintain the separation of commerce and banking, arguing that the bill could allow Elon Musk, Walmart, and others to create their own currencies. Rep. Bryan Steil argued that the amendment would stifle innovation. Rep. French Hill expressed hope for a thoughtful solution to Waters' concerns while advancing a broader crypto market structure bill. The amendment was ultimately rejected. Wilmarth concludes that the stablecoin legislation presents a dangerous opportunity for Big Tech to enter banking significantly, making it nearly impossible to reverse course.

In today's world, accessing online services is as crucial as having electricity or water. Just as we expect reliable electricity and clean water, we should demand the same from the internet. Our data now defines who we are, encompassing our relationships, thoughts, interests, and memories. We, not Big Tech, should control this information. Utah's innovative new law aims to achieve this by empowering individuals to manage their data on social media. The Digital Choice Act, effective July 1, 2026, represents a significant move towards granting individuals, rather than social media companies, control over their personal data. This law will allow users to transfer their content and connections to different apps using open-source protocols if they are dissatisfied with a social media platform. This ease of movement and compatibility provides the freedom to manage their digital lives without losing their history. Furthermore, the law enables users to completely delete their data upon leaving a platform. For a long time, the saying has been, "If you are not paying for the product, you are the product." Social media platforms don't charge users; instead, they sell user attention to advertisers. The Digital Choice Act aims to reverse this dynamic, returning control to the users. Currently, social media giants employ addictive algorithms to engage users, gather data, and influence behavior for financial gain. Research indicates that these practices can have a particularly negative impact on teens and young adults. Americans are waking up to these dangers. Laws like the Digital Choice Act prioritize people by reducing barriers to entry and creating opportunities for new social media platforms. History has demonstrated the effectiveness of interoperability: the Telecommunications Act of 1996 fostered innovation in mobile services and broadband, leading to over $1.5 trillion in private investment in the telecom industry. Similarly, the UK's open banking reforms in 2018 spurred the creation of numerous fintech startups. As the situation stands, people's livelihoods and digital identities are constantly vulnerable because corporations control their data. We frequently see this play out. For instance, when TikTok faced a potential ban on January 19, millions of Americans risked losing access to years' worth of relationships and content. The Digital Choice Act would have allowed users to move their data, content, and communities from TikTok to a platform of their choice. Many individuals also suffer from arbitrary decisions made by platforms that lack proper oversight and offer limited recourse, appeals, or exit options. Laws like the Digital Choice Act empower creators and ordinary social media users to transfer their content and communities to platforms that better suit their needs. The law also allows people to simultaneously share posts across multiple platforms, reaching their friends and followers wherever they are. The fundamental issue of platforms holding our data hostage and using it against us is becoming a major challenge of our time. It underlies a business model that harms children, polarizes communities, and threatens national security. The Digital Choice Act starts by addressing these issues on social media, where the harms are perhaps most evident. However, the recent 23andMe breach, which jeopardized the DNA of 15 million customers, underscores that these concerns have wider implications. The consequences will only worsen as AI becomes more integrated into the economy and the internet. It is crucial to address this before it's too late. Utah has consistently been a leader in consumer data protection. In 2024, Utah passed two laws (S.B. 194 and H.B. 464) aimed at protecting minors, strengthening parental controls, and holding social media companies accountable for mental health issues. As policymakers and parents, we have a responsibility to do more. We urge other states, countries, and the federal government to follow Utah's example. Data rights are human rights and should be protected by law. If people have the ability to move their data between platforms, it will fundamentally change a flawed system that is harming our children, communities, and country. Data interoperability is achievable, as social media platforms already use common protocols to facilitate data portability. Millions stand to benefit from improved laws and technology that support data portability and app interoperability. We can no longer accept a situation where corporations control our online lives. It's time to create a future where individuals own and control their digital identities. Shouldn't you own you? Spencer Cox is the Governor of Utah and outgoing chair of the National Governors Association. Frank H. McCourt Jr. is the executive chairman of McCourt Global, founder of Project Liberty, and author of “Our Biggest Fight.”