Does LB 94 Ban Cryptocurrency?
Language copied from a Missouri law might be a problem
by Sue Greenwald, M.D.
Not being a banker, I can’t say whether this writer is correct, but State Senators need to put a pause on LB 94 until they know for sure.
Getty Images
Please read this:
The premise is that the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) officianados at the Fed are targeting red states to insert vague and confusing language into long and boring bills in order to set up the states for monetary control. The concern came up last year regarding Senator Slama’s banking bill and language was added to specifically address that concern. So far, so good.
Amendment 2063, page 1 line 4.
1-112 Uniform Commercial Code, how construed.
The Uniform Commercial Code shall not be construed to support, endorse, create, or implement a national digital currency or central bank digital currency.
The problem that has been identified occurs on Page 6, line 29 of LB 94. This language is partially new and partially pre-existing. The italicized parts are new:
29 (24) "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.
Compare this to the language in the Missouri bill which this author says specifically bans cryptocurrency:
“‘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.”
If you have not read the entire article above, the pertinent parts by Tom Renz are here:
“If COVID taught us anything it was that an emergency, real or faked, facilitates a lot of things that would never happen otherwise. The tyrants know this and are in the process of creating financial emergencies that will allow them to argue that there is no alternative but to implement CBDCs. The Biden Administration is implementing policy after policy that devalues the American dollar by limiting Americas ability to mine its own resources or produce its own goods while printing endless money. This will (or more likely is) facilitate an economic collapse. Meanwhile, WEF/CCP partner groups like Black Rock and Vanguard are leveraging their positions as major stakeholders in small and midsized banks to force the banks to accept terrible ESG and other risky investments that will, when combined with the inflation/devalued dollar and scarce resources, result in their collapse. This is an obvious thing to anyone that truly understands the inner-workings of banking (I ran a credit union for a number of years, was a compliance expert, and was involved in a number of national-level groups/projects).
Along with the effort to collapse the dollar and our banking system, the tyrants are also pushing legislation that can allow CBDCs to exist legally and without competition. This is being done in a VERY sneaky way because of the massive political opposition to anything CBDC-related. At this point, the major focus is on passing state-level legislation - particularly in a number of key RED states. Bills are being pushed that appear innocuous but are written to create a check-mate situation when CBDCs come into play. That way these red states won’t be able to oppose it.
These same bills would also ban any current forms of crypto like Bitcoin as a competitor for CBDC. These UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) changes reflect the state law changes to meet the goals laid out by the Fed (here’s an overview).
Bills promoting these changes are pushing through hard red state such as Missouri (HB1165), Oklahoma (HB2776), Texas (SB2075), and Tennessee (SB479/HB640). They are also in a ton of other states and need to be stopped in all of them.”
The author recommends to remove the above language and recommends Five amendments to strengthen our state laws against CBDC. Only one of those amendments has been proposed in Nebraska, the one quoted above. By itself, that amendment appears to be weak protection.
Edits, 24 hrs after the original post:
More sources have been shared with me and my original source is confirmed. Our Nebraska Senators are about to pass a bill that will limit our state to government controlled currency.
Fact 6: The 2022 UCC amendments would redefine money so that existing cryptocurrencies could never be considered “money” under the UCC.
The 2022 amendments clearly establish in Article 1 that “money” under the UCC “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.”
Because all existing cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, are “electronic records” serving as a “medium of exchange” prior to being adopted as “money” by the U.S. government, all cryptocurrencies would be prevented from qualifying as “money” under the UCC. Importantly, this would be true under the UCC regardless of whether Congress were to designate a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin as money in the future.
Instead of being classified as “money,” the UCC amendments would designate cryptocurrencies as “controllable electronic records.”
The third source is Glenn Beck, who created a web page to warn state legislatures:
12 GOP-led states push Central Bank Digital Currency. - Glenn Beck. Yes, there is a Nebraska page.
Contact your State Senator about this concern. Before this law is passed, our legislators need to be aware of what they may be getting into. Governor Kristi Noem may be a good resource as she recently vetoed a similar bill. Arizona and Arkansas recently killed similar bills. The Banking, Commerce and Insurance Committee seats the following Senators:
Committee Members