On February 22, Montana’s House rejected a bill that would have designated Bitcoin as a state reserve asset, as numerous lawmakers expressed concerns over potential excessive speculation of taxpayer funds by the state’s investment board.
The vote against House Bill No. 429 concluded at 41-59, with many Republican lawmakers opposing the measure. The bill aimed to establish a special revenue account for investing in precious metals, stablecoins, and digital assets that have maintained an average market cap exceeding $750 billion over the previous calendar year — a benchmark that only Bitcoin (BTC) satisfies.
“It’s still taxpayer money, and we’re responsible for it, and we need to protect it,” remarked State Representative Steven Kelly during the Feb. 22 House Floor Session in Montana, asserting that “these types of investments are way too risky.”
Representative Bill Mercer also opposed the concept of granting Montana’s Board of Investments the authority to invest in cryptocurrencies and non-fungible tokens.
“I did not come here to do that,” he stated, while another legislator added, “This smacks of speculation to me.”
🚨 MONTANA Update:
Bitcoin Reserve bill HB 429 failed to pass a second reading in the Montana House. It is now effectively dead.
The vote was 41 – 59. It was largely partisan, but many Republicans voted against the bill.
ANALYSIS:
HB 429 failed in the House, largely due to… pic.twitter.com/AJK8sPrf1N
— Bitcoin Laws (@Bitcoin_Laws) February 22, 2025
On the other hand, Representative Lee Demming argued that Montana should strive to maximize returns on taxpayer funds and believed the bill could have enabled that.
“If we’re going to keep the taxpayer’s money, I think we owe it to the taxpayers to get as high a return on that money that’s sitting in there, either that or you give it right back to them, so I’m going to vote on this bill for that reason.”
“The only thing that is risky is not passing this bill,” emphasized Curtis Schomer, the bill’s sponsor, pointing out that Montana’s investment board would forfeit purchasing power by sticking with bonds.
Representative Steve Fitzpatrick stated that Montana’s investment board “has a lot of money sitting in the bank” that could be better allocated towards investing in precious metals and digital assets.
“We can make a return to the taxpayer and ultimately that will allow us to give more money back, to cut taxes, and provide that fiscal relief that people are looking for.”
Other legislators recognized the potential of House Bill No. 429 but called for additional amendments.
Related: South African firm chooses Bitcoin reserve strategy as inflation hedge
Just days prior, on February 19, Montana’s business and labor committee had passed House Bill No. 429 with a 12-8 vote, where all Republicans voted in favor and all Democrats opposed.
With House Bill No. 429 now essentially dead, any future proposals for a Bitcoin reserve would require reintroduction in Montana’s legislature.
In total, twenty-four states have proposed legislation to create a Bitcoin reserve, encompassing Arizona, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Texas.
According to Bitcoin Laws, bills in 20 of these 24 states remain active.
Utah has progressed the furthest in regulatory action concerning a Bitcoin reserve, having advanced its HB230 “Blockchain and Digital Innovation Amendments” bill through the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee on February 20.
This bill is slated for a second and third reading before a final Senate vote is conducted.
Magazine: MegaETH launch could save Ethereum… but at what cost?
