Anti-Cbdc Surveillance State Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of my friend from Minnesota, Whip Emmer's bill, the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act, a bill I am proud to cosponsor. This bill would prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a central bank digital currency, or a CBDC, to anyone.

I don't think the Federal Reserve has the authority to do this. In fact, a cursory, simple review of the Federal Reserve Act shows that the Federal Reserve does not have the legal authority to issue a CBDC to individuals absent explicit authorizing legislation from Congress. The Supreme Court has also recognized Congress' power to coin money and regulate the value thereof, implicitly denying to the executive branch or to the Fed the ability to do this without congressional authority.

That said, I think it is prudent to explicitly deprive the Fed of the authority to do this for a variety of reasons.

As has been said, Americans' financial privacy is at stake here, and we should not try to compete with China by becoming more like China. The argument for a CBDC that Beijing is doing this, so we should do it, too, why on Earth would we want to imitate, emulate, or copy Beijing's surveillance-state authoritarianism?

To my friend on the other side of the aisle who just made the argument that we are behind and the European Central Bank is doing this, when have we in this country, the United States of America, wanted to emulate Europe?

This is America. We do it the American way, not the European way, not the Chinese way, and not the Communist, socialist way. We do it the free enterprise way. We do it the limited government way. We do it the way to honor Americans' privacy through the GENIUS Act and through private stablecoins. That is the way we should do it. That is the way we should lead in innovation.

Yes, personal privacy is at stake. Surveillance of Americans' individual financial transactions through a CBDC does raise serious privacy concerns and concerns about government control and politicization of loans, online payments, credit scores, tax compliance, Federal contracts, monetary policy, and the like.

In addition to these privacy concerns, a central bank digital currency would centralize Americans' finances, eroding the banking deposit base. That would decrease competition and choice.

This is a big concern that I have, that a CBDC would substantially decrease the availability of credit and increase the cost of financial services and products for consumers, destroying our conventional, traditional banking system.

Our banking system, in contrast to Europe and China, is the envy of the world due to its free market principles, dynamism, and diversity. Banks of all different sizes serve customers, communities, and businesses with all different needs. Capitalism promotes market demands, which incentivize banks to offer products that fit the needs of their consumers at the best price possible.

We don't want to eliminate that. We don't want to erode the deposit base with a CBDC.

I ask, Mr. Speaker, would we truly want to lose the benefits of a diverse banking system that makes the U.S. the global leader in the financial system? Do we want to take actions to be more like China or Europe and decrease Americans' right to privacy?

I went to the European Central Bank. I heard them lecture us about a CBDC, and it made me more convinced than ever that we don't want to be like Europe.

The answer is that we do not want to be like Europe and that we do not want to be like the Communists in Beijing. We must disintermediate our banking system and allow for the creation of a CBDC. We must not threaten Americans' access to privacy.

That is why I support this legislation, and I urge all of my colleagues to do so, as well.

If my Republican colleagues really don't like a CBDC, then vote for the GENIUS Act, which takes away all the arguments for it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source