In July, the American state of Wyoming shared an open job position for the head of its Stable Token Commission.
The executive will work alongside Wyoming’s governor, state auditor, state treasurer and four expert appointees to bring the state’s very own stablecoin to life.
While Wyoming was the first to pass a law on a state stablecoin, it isn’t the only state considering launching its own digital currency.
In April, a similar initiative was proposed in Texas, where lawmakers introduced bills for creating a state-based digital currency backed by gold.
However, the idea of state stablecoins raises many questions: How would they affect the monetary stability of fiat money and the power of the Federal Reserve? Could they be compatible with a central bank digital currency? Do people really want to return to a system with state banks printing their own monetary notes?
The Wyoming experiment
The Wyoming Stable Token Act was originally introduced in February 2022, in the midst of the crypto market crisis. The bill defines the Wyoming stable token as a virtual currency representative of and redeemable for one U.S. dollar held in trust by the state of Wyoming. Basically, the state would tokenize the federal currency on a 1:1 ratio with deposits.
NEWS–bipartisan group of top #Wyoming legislators proposed a bill for State of Wyoming to issue a #stablecoin, 100% backed by USTreasuries, where the State keeps the float. I see pros & cons (didn’t know it was coming) but❤️that Wyoming continues to explore cool #crypto ideas! https://t.co/BXbELukUQE
Explaining why state lawmakers took such an interest in the digital token project, Chris Rothfuss, the minority leader in the Wyoming State Senate, told Cointelegraph:
“Wyoming needs to be able to transact in a digital currency — to accept payments, to make payments, and to do so without risk. The Wyoming stable token is the solution to that challenge.”
A notable reservation in Section 2 of the Stable Token Act makes the state’s attorney general responsible for monitoring the startup phase of the token’s issuance. Should the attorney general believe it contradicts federal or state law, the project would be frozen.
The bill also sets a deadline for the project: The commission’s director shall provide their report on the doability of the stable token no later than Nov. 1, 2023.
Other than that, the document doesn’t specify much; instead, it establishes the Stable Token Commission with the authority to craft further details.
The legislation’s path wasn’t easy. In March 2022, Governor Mark Gordon vetoed the bill, saying he was “unconvinced” that the state’s Treasury was ready to implement the project safely.
Gordon criticized the lack of information and the cost of accounting services, blockchain development and other necessary expenses, and he was skeptical of the project’s purported benefits.
A year later, the governor applauded the effort made by legislators to enhance the document, but voiced new reservations:
“First and foremost, there was no overall plan (a ‘business plan’ for lack of a better term) or, if a plan exists, it did not appear to have been used to guide the legislators in crafting the legislation.”
On March 22, 2023, the Stable Token Act was passed into law without Governor Gordon’s signature. Gordon recognized the state stable token’s potential to “nurture Wyoming’s reputation as a leader in the digital asset world” and deemed the improvements made by the bill’s authors enough to allow it to become law.
The era of multiple stablecoins?
Neither the U.S. Federal Reserve nor any crypto-focused legislators have reacted publicly to the Wyoming project, but it is hard to imagine any kind of affirmative response, given that the American dollar was established precisely to provide a countrywide monetary standard and bring the currency under the purview of the federal government.
So, in principle, any state token project could contradict the logic of central bank currency to a similar degree as private cryptocurrencies.
At the same time, the potential value of Wyoming’s stable token is rigorously tied to the same old American dollar, which makes it less of a separate currency and more of a state-issued financial asset, similar to the state-issued notes for specie of the 19th century.
A $40 note issued by the State Bank of Georgia in 1855. Source: Southern Style Currency
Rothfuss clarified, “We are not issuing a new currency. The Wyoming stable token is a digital representation of a U.S. dollar held in trust by the state of Wyoming on behalf of the tokenholder. We are not competing with the Federal Reserve — we are enabling a technology.”
Some observers still see a potential conflict between the states and the Fed. “Certainly, there will be a tussle between states and the federal government over the former attempting to issue their own stablecoins,” Brent Xu, CEO of Web3 bond-market platform Umee, told Cointelegraph.
But there could be a compromise in which the Federal Reserve allows states to issue stablecoins under a particular framework, he believes, noting the discussions concerning a national framework for stablecoins.
Zachary Townsend, CEO of Bitcoin-based life insurance provider Meanwhile, doesn’t see any potential problems with state stablecoins, as he believes that the very concept of a stablecoin is open to almost any entity, political or corporate, as the recent example with PayPal’s initiative has shown.
He told Cointelegraph, “There are going to be tons of private stablecoins. If I just looked at my life and all the companies I have ‘accounts’ or ‘wallets’ or ‘balances’ with, those are going to transform to become stablecoins within a few years.”
This is something Peter Herzog, state policy lead at the Crypto Council for Innovation, can agree with. “There are a variety of models for stablecoins that involve different decisions around underlying collateral, governance and more,” he explained to Cointelegraph. For Herzog, it comes as no surprise that individual states with an active interest in crypto are continuing their experiments with new initiatives:
“Until we see a federal regulatory framework, it is likely that states continue to step in to create rules of the road to promote innovation and protect consumers.”
As the EU’s MiCA regulation and the UK’s evolving crypto laws diverge, fund managers face a key choice: to opt for the EU’s legal certainty and passporting or the UK’s flexible, innovation-driven approach.
Sir Keir Starmer has said he gets “frustrated” with politicians who “shout and scream but do nothing” as he defended past comments about a grooming gangs inquiry.
Speaking to Sky News’s political editor Beth Rigby, the prime minister was asked if he regretted saying in January that those calling for a national probe into paedophile rings were “jumping on a far-right bandwagon” – given he has now agreed to one.
Sir Keir said he was “really clear” he was talking about the Tories, who were demanding an inquiry they never set up when they were in government.
He said: “I was calling out those politicians.
“I am frustrated with politics when people shout and scream a lot and do nothing when they’ve got the opportunity to do it. It’s one of the worst aspects of politics, in my view.”
Sir Keir also said there “must be accountability” for authorities who “shied away” from talking about the ethnicity of perpetrators for fear of being branded racist, as exposed in a report by Baroness Casey published on Monday.
More from Politics
Asked if he is happy for “social workers, policemen and people that failed” to be held accountable, the prime minister said: “Where the inquiry uncovers failure or wrongdoing, then there should absolutely be accountability.
“That is amongst the purposes of an inquiry, and it’s a statutory inquiry… which will therefore mean there is power to compel evidence of witnesses because it’s important that it is comprehensive and important that it gets to every single issue. And as part of that process, there’s accountability for individuals who did wrong.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:18
Data dismissed ‘Asian grooming gangs’
Baroness Casey was asked to produce an audit of sexual abuse carried out by grooming gangs in England and Wales in January, when comments by tech billionaire Elon Muskbrought the scandal back into the spotlight.
The government’s position has changed following Baroness Casey’s audit, which recommended an inquiry.
Her report found that ethnicity data is not recorded for two-thirds of grooming gang perpetrators.
However at a local level in three police forces – Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire – “there has been a disproportionality of group-based child sexual exploitation offending by men of Asian ethnicity”.
The cross bench peer said instead of looking into whether ethnicity or cultural factors played a part, authorities “avoided the topic altogether for fear of appearing racist”, and this warranted further investigation.