Have you read and carefully analyzed the Lummis BITCOIN Act of 2024?
I have, which is why I must tell you why this bill is not only philosophically misguided but, practically speaking, utterly preposterous. I'll also help you understand who is funding Sen. Cynthia Lummis.
🧵👇
I have, which is why I must tell you why this bill is not only philosophically misguided but, practically speaking, utterly preposterous. I'll also help you understand who is funding Sen. Cynthia Lummis.
🧵👇
First, understand that in simple terms, the bill proposes the establishment of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, where the United States would purchase and custody 1M Bitcoin over five years to enhance national financial security and diversify reserves.
The bill also mandates a 20-year minimum holding period and uses Federal Reserve resources to offset costs, signaling a clear shift toward Bitcoin as a strategic asset.
The bill also mandates a 20-year minimum holding period and uses Federal Reserve resources to offset costs, signaling a clear shift toward Bitcoin as a strategic asset.
So why is the bill fundamentally flawed and why has it received no support in Congress?
1.) It Signals Weakness, Not Strength
By proposing to trade U.S. dollars for Bitcoin, the U.S. government is effectively admitting that Bitcoin is superior to the dollar. This is a catastrophic signal to the rest of the world. The dollar’s status as the global reserve currency is built on trust and dominance. If the United States begins hoarding Bitcoin, it will send a clear message to the world that the issuer of the global reserve currency no longer believes in its own currency.
This move would accelerate the rapid decline of the dollar and hasten the rise of Bitcoin as the global reserve currency.
1.) It Signals Weakness, Not Strength
By proposing to trade U.S. dollars for Bitcoin, the U.S. government is effectively admitting that Bitcoin is superior to the dollar. This is a catastrophic signal to the rest of the world. The dollar’s status as the global reserve currency is built on trust and dominance. If the United States begins hoarding Bitcoin, it will send a clear message to the world that the issuer of the global reserve currency no longer believes in its own currency.
This move would accelerate the rapid decline of the dollar and hasten the rise of Bitcoin as the global reserve currency.
2.) The Bill is Politically Dead on Arrival
This bill has zero chance of passing Congress. Please understand this fact.
Most politicians don’t understand Bitcoin and those who do are unlikely to support a bill that undermines the dollar’s dominance. The idea of the United States buying Bitcoin is politically toxic. It would be seen as a reckless gamble with taxpayer money, and it would face fierce opposition from both sides of the aisle.
Even if the bill were to pass it would face legal and logistical challenges.
The Federal Reserve, which is tasked with protecting the dollar, would never allow its resources to be used to purchase Bitcoin. The idea of using Federal Reserve remittances and gold certificates to fund Bitcoin purchases is ludicrous on every level. Understand this.
This bill has zero chance of passing Congress. Please understand this fact.
Most politicians don’t understand Bitcoin and those who do are unlikely to support a bill that undermines the dollar’s dominance. The idea of the United States buying Bitcoin is politically toxic. It would be seen as a reckless gamble with taxpayer money, and it would face fierce opposition from both sides of the aisle.
Even if the bill were to pass it would face legal and logistical challenges.
The Federal Reserve, which is tasked with protecting the dollar, would never allow its resources to be used to purchase Bitcoin. The idea of using Federal Reserve remittances and gold certificates to fund Bitcoin purchases is ludicrous on every level. Understand this.
3.) The U.S. Government Cannot Be Trusted with Bitcoin
Since the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and subsequent disastrous moves since then, the federal government has displayed a clear penchant for mismanaging monetary policy, inflating the money supply and eroding the purchasing power of the dollar.
Bitcoin is hard money, the hardest money ever—scarce, immutable, and resistant to manipulation. The U.S. government, on the other hand, has proven time and again that it cannot resist the temptation to debase currency for short-term political gains.
The bill’s requirement to hold Bitcoin for 20 years is preposterous . Governments operate on short-term election cycles, not long-term financial discipline. There is no guarantee that future administrations won’t cave to political pressure and liquidate the Bitcoin holdings, destabilizing the market and betraying the trust of Bitcoin holders worldwide.
Since the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and subsequent disastrous moves since then, the federal government has displayed a clear penchant for mismanaging monetary policy, inflating the money supply and eroding the purchasing power of the dollar.
Bitcoin is hard money, the hardest money ever—scarce, immutable, and resistant to manipulation. The U.S. government, on the other hand, has proven time and again that it cannot resist the temptation to debase currency for short-term political gains.
The bill’s requirement to hold Bitcoin for 20 years is preposterous . Governments operate on short-term election cycles, not long-term financial discipline. There is no guarantee that future administrations won’t cave to political pressure and liquidate the Bitcoin holdings, destabilizing the market and betraying the trust of Bitcoin holders worldwide.
4.) The idea that Congress would pass legislation to buy 1M Bitcoin at a cost of trillions of dollars would immediately draw outrage from taxpayers and lawmakers alike. Congress can’t agree on even basic budget allocations without gridlock, yet somehow, we’re supposed to believe they’ll greenlight a gamble on a volatile, decentralized asset that almost none of them understand and present this sum to a public who are more skeptical and ignorant of Bitcoin than they are?
It’s fiscal fantasy that would never survive the first committee hearing.
It’s fiscal fantasy that would never survive the first committee hearing.
But possibly most concering is that Lummis is funded by Multicoin Capital and Andreessen Horowitz—two of the most prominent and aggressive crypto VCs—raises serious questions about her motivations and the integrity of this legislation.
These firms have a vested interest in seeing Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies gain mainstream adoption, as their portfolios are heavily invested in the success of crypto. By sponsoring a bill that would funnel $1T or more of taxpayer money into Bitcoin, Lummis is effectively using her position to advance the financial interests of her backers.
This is a classic case of regulatory capture, where lawmakers push policies that benefit themselves and their donors at the expense of the people.
Lummis’s bill is less about idealist nontions of national financial prosperity and more about creating a taxpayer-funded windfall for her VC allies. It’s a blatant conflict of interest that undermines trust in both her leadership and the legislative process.
Oppose it.
These firms have a vested interest in seeing Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies gain mainstream adoption, as their portfolios are heavily invested in the success of crypto. By sponsoring a bill that would funnel $1T or more of taxpayer money into Bitcoin, Lummis is effectively using her position to advance the financial interests of her backers.
This is a classic case of regulatory capture, where lawmakers push policies that benefit themselves and their donors at the expense of the people.
Lummis’s bill is less about idealist nontions of national financial prosperity and more about creating a taxpayer-funded windfall for her VC allies. It’s a blatant conflict of interest that undermines trust in both her leadership and the legislative process.
Oppose it.
The irony of this bill is staggering: Bitcoin was created to free humanity from the control of governments and central banks, yet here we have an absurd proposal for the United States to seize and control a massive portion of the Bitcoin supply.
The entire premise of Bitcoin is that it is decentralized, permissionless, and resistant to state interference—qualities that allow anyone, anywhere, to benefit from it without needing approval from any authority.
If the government succeeds in owning a significant portion of Bitcoin, it would centralize control over a system designed to be decentralized, effectively turning Bitcoin into just another tool of state power.
The entire premise of Bitcoin is that it is decentralized, permissionless, and resistant to state interference—qualities that allow anyone, anywhere, to benefit from it without needing approval from any authority.
If the government succeeds in owning a significant portion of Bitcoin, it would centralize control over a system designed to be decentralized, effectively turning Bitcoin into just another tool of state power.
This is the ultimate hypocrisy: a government that has spent decades using inflation to steal its citizens life force, bailing out banks, and eroding financial sovereignty now wants to co-opt the one monetary system that was built to escape its grasp.
Bitcoin’s value lies in its independence from the state—not in becoming a pawn in the government’s financial games. This bill is a desperate attempt to hijack a revolution that was meant to render governments obsolete.
Bitcoin’s value lies in its independence from the state—not in becoming a pawn in the government’s financial games. This bill is a desperate attempt to hijack a revolution that was meant to render governments obsolete.
The BITCOIN Act of 2024 is not just misguided policy—it’s a direct assault on the very principles of freedom, decentralization, and financial sovereignty that Bitcoin represents. This bill seeks to turn Bitcoin, the people’s money, into a tool of state control, centralizing what was designed to be decentralized and handing power back to the very institutions Bitcoin was created to dismantle.
Bitcoin belongs to the people, not to politicians or their VC backers. It is our escape from inflation, financial repression, and the endless overreach of centralized power. By opposing this bill, we defend not just Bitcoin, but the future of money itself—a future where individuals, not governments, control their wealth and destiny.
Spread the word, and make it clear: Bitcoin is not for the state. It is for the people. Let’s protect what Satoshi gave us—a decentralized, permissionless, and unstoppable form of money.
Bitcoin belongs to the people, not to politicians or their VC backers. It is our escape from inflation, financial repression, and the endless overreach of centralized power. By opposing this bill, we defend not just Bitcoin, but the future of money itself—a future where individuals, not governments, control their wealth and destiny.
Spread the word, and make it clear: Bitcoin is not for the state. It is for the people. Let’s protect what Satoshi gave us—a decentralized, permissionless, and unstoppable form of money.
In short, the BITCOIN Act of 2024 is a pipe dream that has no chance of becoming law. Given the current political and economic climate, it will never make it to a vote, let alone pass.
Here’s why:
Political Resistance: Most members of Congress, especially those outside the crypto-friendly fringe, are deeply skeptical of Bitcoin. Many still view it as a speculative asset, a tool for criminals, or an environmental hazard that's boiling the oceans. Convincing a majority of lawmakers to support a bill that would spend $1T or more of taxpayer money on Bitcoin is nonsensical (at least for the foreseeable future). The idea of the U.S. buying Bitcoin is politically toxic and would face fierce opposition from both sides of the aisle.
Budgetary Concerns: Even if some lawmakers were sympathetic to the idea, the sheer cost of the proposal would be a non-starter. The U.S. government is already grappling with massive deficits and debt. Spending such a gargantuan sum would be seen as reckless and irresponsible, especially when that money could be used for pressing needs like infrastructure, healthcare, or education. The bill would likely die in committee once the price tag was revealed.
Federal Reserve Pushback: The Federal Reserve, which is tasked with protecting the dollar’s dominance, would almost certainly oppose this bill. The idea of using Federal Reserve resources to fund Bitcoin purchases would be seen as a direct threat to the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency. The Fed’s influence over monetary policy and its close ties to Congress would make it a formidable opponent.
Public Outrage: The American public would likely react with outrage to the idea of the government gambling a trillion dollars on Bitcoin. Many people still haven't even heard of Bitcoin, most don't understand it, and those who do would likely oppose the government’s attempt to centralize control over it. The bill would be a political liability for any lawmaker who supported it and none will.
Here’s why:
Political Resistance: Most members of Congress, especially those outside the crypto-friendly fringe, are deeply skeptical of Bitcoin. Many still view it as a speculative asset, a tool for criminals, or an environmental hazard that's boiling the oceans. Convincing a majority of lawmakers to support a bill that would spend $1T or more of taxpayer money on Bitcoin is nonsensical (at least for the foreseeable future). The idea of the U.S. buying Bitcoin is politically toxic and would face fierce opposition from both sides of the aisle.
Budgetary Concerns: Even if some lawmakers were sympathetic to the idea, the sheer cost of the proposal would be a non-starter. The U.S. government is already grappling with massive deficits and debt. Spending such a gargantuan sum would be seen as reckless and irresponsible, especially when that money could be used for pressing needs like infrastructure, healthcare, or education. The bill would likely die in committee once the price tag was revealed.
Federal Reserve Pushback: The Federal Reserve, which is tasked with protecting the dollar’s dominance, would almost certainly oppose this bill. The idea of using Federal Reserve resources to fund Bitcoin purchases would be seen as a direct threat to the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency. The Fed’s influence over monetary policy and its close ties to Congress would make it a formidable opponent.
Public Outrage: The American public would likely react with outrage to the idea of the government gambling a trillion dollars on Bitcoin. Many people still haven't even heard of Bitcoin, most don't understand it, and those who do would likely oppose the government’s attempt to centralize control over it. The bill would be a political liability for any lawmaker who supported it and none will.
I'm not in any way associated with The Bitcoin Policy Institute but I also reviewed their recent 47-page report "A Global Economic Reordering." I think you will find its ideas realistic and compelling.
You can see it here:
You can see it here:
https://x.com/1914ad/status/1871619171068637184
I understand this will not be very well received but I sat down and started typing and couldn't stop. I've been wanting to do this because of all the naive, uninformed responses I've gotten any time I've criticized this, with most not understanding that yes, of course I believe that the governments can benefit from sound money. However, the issuer of the global reserve asset will never, ever signal the rapid demise of that currency by trading it for a more sound one.
As I've said before, "the American way" is defending dollar dominance at all cost.
If you can't understand that fact, I can't help you.
I am happy to debate you but I'm no longer responding to glib "why do you hate America, bro?" replies.
And no, I'm not going to "bet on it." Not because I don't think there is a nil chance of this legislation passing but because such a wager is a needless distraction for me and I'm not sending Bitcoin to escrow to facilitate such nonsense.
As I've said before, "the American way" is defending dollar dominance at all cost.
If you can't understand that fact, I can't help you.
I am happy to debate you but I'm no longer responding to glib "why do you hate America, bro?" replies.
And no, I'm not going to "bet on it." Not because I don't think there is a nil chance of this legislation passing but because such a wager is a needless distraction for me and I'm not sending Bitcoin to escrow to facilitate such nonsense.
Also understand that I have focued here only on the Lummis Act, congressional legislation. I am not speaking about Executive Orders or Jason Lowery's "energy-based competition" thesis from Soft War, which I find fascinating.
Whether you agree or not with what I've said, if you happened to find this thread provocative, informative or compelling, please consider liking and reposting.
If it gets some attention, I might take the time to prepare a comprehensive report. For now, I'm going to stop.
Thank you.
If it gets some attention, I might take the time to prepare a comprehensive report. For now, I'm going to stop.
Thank you.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
