Tag Archives: Arizona Senate

Arizona, Colorado, and Wyoming Present Legislation Supporting Cryptocurrency

Lawmakers in Arizona, Colorado, and Wyoming have all recently taken legislative action that seeks to further support cryptocurrency.

On Thursday, the Arizona Senate passed a bill that would allow residents to pay income taxes using Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. This implementation has practical significance, allowing the use of cryptocurrencies as a payment option in a state revenue system legitimizes them as an everyday alternative payment medium.

A provision in the bill mandates that the cryptocurrency payments be exchanged for fiat currency within 24 hours. This provision seeks to address the volatility of cryptocurrency and mitigate state revenue concerns.

Republican Arizona State Representative Jeff Weninger, who co-sponsored the bill, said he wants Arizona to be at the forefront of technological innovation. He told Fox News:

“It’s one of a litany of bills that we’re running that is sending a signal to everyone in the United States, and possibly throughout the world, that Arizona is going to be the place to be for blockchain and digital currency technology in the future.”

Consideration by the Arizona House of Representatives will be the next step for this bill.

[RELATED: What Is a DAO and Why Is It Revolutionary?]

In Colorado, a bill was introduced in the Senate proposing the use of blockchain for governmental data security. Senate Bill 86 seeks to use the blockchain ledger feature for its ability to securely record transactions. The bill aims to “control functionality, track transactions, verify identities, support uniformity, resist tampering, enable logistical control for large numbers of participants, protect privacy, and support accountability and auditing.”

Sumana Nallapati, Colorado’s secretary of technology and state chief information officer told StateScoop:

“In Colorado, we try to be a leader in any technology that can transform and enable better government. To be an early adopter of blockchain, our hope is that it will allow Colorado to shape the industry by offering lessons learned, creating jobs, and providing better services to our customers.”

Legislators in Wyoming have introduced two bills, House Bills 19 and 70, that would limit regulatory control over cryptocurrency trading.

Coinbase, the most widely used buying and selling cryptocurrency platform, suspended its services in Wyoming a couple of years ago. Many other platforms followed their decision because the states regulatory burdens have been too costly.

The Wyoming Division of Banking requires cryptocurrency trading platforms to hold an equal value of fiat funds to the aggregate value of funds held by customers. Although Hawaii has the same regulation, this response has not been typical in other states.

Coinbase and other platforms found these regulations to impractical to continue services in the state.

House Bill 19 “would clarify the provision that state regulators are currently relying on to bar the trading” while House Bill 70 “would clarify that traders are not subject to certain other state finance regulations,” according to the Casper Star Tribune, providing the opportunity for platforms to continue services in the State.

Bill to Block NDAA Indefinite Detention Provisions Passes Ariz. Senate Committee

A bill that would prevent federal officials from enforcing the indefinite detention provisions found in sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 within Arizona has passed a key committee of the Arizona State Senate.

On Tuesday, Senate Bill 1437 passed the Senate Federalism, Mandates and Fiscal Responsibility Committee with 4 voting in favor and 2 voting against. The bill would prohibit federal officials from indefinitely detaining civilian residents in the state. It would also prohibit extrajudicial executions of any person or resident in Arizona.

Bill sponsor Sen. Judy Burges (R-Sun City West), who said that the NDAA indefinite detention provisions are a threat to civil liberties, told The Arizona Daily Star, “We’re trying to push back against federal overreach.

[RELATED: California Nullifies NDAA Indefinite Detention]

The bill states, “The legislature finds that this state is not a battlefield subject to the laws of war, and that neither Congress nor the President of the United States can constitutionally authorize the detention or disposition of any person in this state or a resident of this state within the United States under the law of war who is not serving in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service during a time of war or public danger.”

Under the proposal, those who violate the prohibitions against unlawful detentions or executions would face prosecution.

[RELATED: Exclusive: Idaho County votes to prohibit NDAA – VIDEO]

People Against the NDAA founder Dan Johnson told the Tenth Amendment Center, “Justice Antonin Scalia said we would be kidding ourselves if we didn’t think the Supreme Court would approve another WWII, Japanese-American style, internment. Arizona has a chance to join several states to head this off and avoid repeating a dark part of American history.

Now that the bill has passed the Senate Federalism, Mandates and Fiscal Responsibility Committee, it must pass another vote before the Rules Committee before it can face a vote by the full State Senate.

If it were to become law, Arizona would become the fifth state with a law on the books limiting military detentions by the federal government, joining California, Alaska, Virginia, and Michigan.

The American Civil Liberties Union said of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which was signed into law by President Obama, “The law is an historic threat because it codifies indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. It could permit the president – and all future presidents – to order the military to imprison indefinitely civilians captured far from any battlefield without charge or trial.

The ACLU added, “There is substantial public debate and uncertainty around whether Sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA could be read even to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act and authorize indefinite military detention without charge or trial within the United States.