Debate in the United States House Financial Services Committee during the markup of the CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act on Sept. 20 occasionally wandered beyond strictly financial and technical issues. Star Wars and anarchists were mentioned in the discussion at various points, as were crypto bros.
Beneath the rhetoric, the value of research, U.S. citizens’ privacy and the role of government in everyday life were discussed as they relate to a U.S. central bank digital currency (CBDC).
Tom Emmer introduced the bill after several other bills had been passed through the committee. He characterized his bill as “simple,” saying, “It halts the efforts of the administrative state under President Biden from issuing a financial surveillance tool that will undermine the American way of life.”
“If not designed to emulate cash, [it] could give the federal government the ability to surveil and restrict Americans’ transactions.”
Emmer mentioned the Chinese digital yuan and government social credit system and Canada’s freezing of bank accounts during the truckers’ protest of 2022 as he introduced the bill. The bill has the support of 60 senators and numerous organizations, according to Emmer.
The House Financial Services Committee’s busy Sept. 20 schedule. Source: House Financial Services Committee
Ranking member Maxine Waters renamed the bill The CBDC Anti-Innovation Act. She said it would threaten the status of the dollar as the principal global reserve currency, adding:
“We don’t know at this point how the introduction of CBDCs could shape the global financial landscape. […] Republicans are making baseless attacks against a CBDC that does not even exist.”
Later she said the bill would “give China the reins to set the global standard for central bank digital currencies.”
Stephen Lynch pointed out some inconsistent language in the bill, and there were questions about what research on CBDC would be allowed under the bill, which was taken up repeatedly during the debate.
Brad Sherman compared cryptocurrency unfavorably to CBDCs. “Keep in mind, this is a pilot program. Keep in mind, no one has to have any digital currency,” he said.
Mike Flood was among those who did not want to trust the government with the power a CBDC could give it. He suggested the government committee members:
“Picture a politician they dislike the most. […] Now imagine that person, and all the ill intentions you ascribe to them, with the power that comes with a retail CBDC.”
The legislators eventually agreed that the bill prevents the issuance of a CBDC without an act of Congress, which has been insisted on by the Federal Reserve from the beginning. The general lack of financial privacy in the country was also noted by both sides.
The Financial Services Committee is set to vote on my bill, the CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act, today. Watch my remarks from the debate: pic.twitter.com/C4S3okdl0w
Waters and Lynch introduced amendments to clarify the bill’s reach over research to authorize the Fed to study the Chinese digital yuan, which could facilitate efforts to evade U.S. sanctions. Waters made reference to the mBridge pilot between China, Hong Kong, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates.
The committee went into recess at 1:30 p.m., local time, after four hours. After reconvening, the committee rejected the amendments and passed the bill, recommending it to the full House on a vote of 27 to 20.
A hostile environment era deportation policy for criminals is being expanded by the Labour government as it continues its migration crackdown.
The government wants to go further in extraditing foreign offenders before they have a chance to appeal by including more countries in the existing scheme.
Offenders that have a human right appeal rejected will get offshored, and further appeals will then get heard from abroad.
It follows the government announcing on Saturday that it wants to deport criminals as soon as they are sentenced.
The “deport now, appeal later” policy was first introduced when Baroness Theresa May was home secretary in 2014 as part of the Conservative government’s hostile environment policy to try and reduce migration.
It saw hundreds of people returned to a handful of countries like Kenya and Jamaica under Section 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, added in via amendment.
In 2017, a Supreme Court effectively stopped the policy from being used after it was challenged on the grounds that appealing from abroad was not compliant with human rights.
More on Theresa May
Related Topics:
However, in 2023, then home secretary Suella Braverman announced she was restarting the policy after providing more facilities abroad for people to lodge their appeals.
Now, the current government says it is expanding the partnership from eight countries to 23.
Previously, offenders were being returned to Finland, Nigeria, Estonia, Albania, Belize, Mauritius, Tanzania and Kosovo for remote hearings.
Angola, Australia, Botswana, Brunei, Bulgaria, Canada, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Latvia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Uganda and Zambia are the countries being added – with the government wanting to include more.
Image: Theresa May’s hostile environment policy proved controversial. Pic: PA
The Home Office claims this is the “the government’s latest tool in its comprehensive approach to scaling up our ability to remove foreign criminals”, touting 5,200 removals of foreign offenders since July 2024 – an increase of 14% compared with the year before.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Those who commit crimes in our country cannot be allowed to manipulate the system, which is why we are restoring control and sending a clear message that our laws must be respected and will be enforced.”
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said: “We are leading diplomatic efforts to increase the number of countries where foreign criminals can be swiftly returned, and if they want to appeal, they can do so safely from their home country.
“Under this scheme, we’re investing in international partnerships that uphold our security and make our streets safer.”
Both ministers opposed the hostile environment policy when in opposition.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
In 2015, Sir Keir Starmer had questioned whether such a policy was workable – saying in-person appeals were the norm for 200 years and had been a “highly effective way of resolving differences”.
He also raised concerns about the impact on children if parents were deported and then returned after a successful appeal.
In today’s announcement, the prime minister’s administration said it wanted to prevent people from “gaming the system” and clamp down on people staying in the UK for “months or years” while appeals are heard.
TRM Labs says the Embargo ransomware group has moved over $34 million in ransom-linked crypto since April, targeting US hospitals and critical infrastructure.