by Tom Renz, Esq., America Outloud:
When it comes to who’s behind the push to sneak in Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) legislation on the state level, we need to look no further than the Uniform Law Commission (the “ULC”… stinking lawyers). The response from many lawmakers when people are questioning these bills is that it’s a conspiracy theory to suggest these Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) bills will facilitate CBDC.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
The ULC is promoting bills that would change the UCC to ensure that states have a state law that is prepared to deal with CBDC. These same bills would also ban any current forms of crypto, like Bitcoin as a competitor for CBDC. These UCC changes reflect the state law changes to meet the goals laid out by the Fed.
Bills promoting these changes are being pushed through hard-red states such as Missouri (HB1165), Oklahoma (HB2776), Texas (SB2075), and Tennessee (SB479/HB640). There are also a ton of other states where these bills need to be stopped. If there’s any proposed legislation that involves banking in your state, ensure that your representatives oppose it.
Let’s take an example from HB1165 in Missouri. I had the pleasure of reading this 103-page bill and can tell you it was physically painful to go through (which is why none of the elected officials will read it – they will just vote based on what the lobbyists or party leadership says). Understand that this is intentional. These CBDC bills are frequently being handed to Republican legislators who are told by leadership to file the bills. Because the bills are so complex and lengthy, most elected officials will not actually read them.
Within HB1165 (not to be confused with HB1169, which requires informed consent and which I support – despite RINO opposition), there are quite a few changes to Missouri law. These important changes were quite expertly crafted to facilitate CBDC without actually talking about it, so Republicans could be fooled into filing the bills even if they did read them. A great example is this new definition of “money” found on page 5:
“‘Money’ means a medium of exchange that is currently authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government. The term includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more countries. The term does not include an electronic record that is a medium of exchange recorded and transferable in a system that existed and operated for the medium of exchange before the medium of exchange was authorized or adopted by the government.”
This language means that existing cryptocurrencies would not be eligible to be considered “money” by banks… a great way to make sure there will be no private competition for CBDC. Not only do we need to fight these bills and ensure they are vetoed as the great Governor Kristi Noem did in South Dakota; when the lobbyists and the RINOs push back, we need to simply request that they add language that specifically states these bills aren’t allowed to track without a warrant and knowledge of consent of the owner, and that traditional money currency, and crypto, will remain an option.
We know they are going to lie like they always do and say that these bills have nothing to do with CBDC, and that we are all conspiracy theorists… again, I can’t stress enough how important it is that more states follow South Dakota’s lead and veto these bills as quickly as possible.