Angry dad Representative Tom Pischke (R-25/Dell Rapids) may be extending his battle to avoid child support payments by promoting fake money. Pischke is the sole sponsor of House Bill 1091, an effort to write virtual (read: not real) currency into South Dakota’s banking law.
South Dakota law says “money” is “a medium of exchange currently authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government.” So in South Dakota, Bitcoin and other technological IOUs aren’t real money. HB 1091 leaves that definition in place but establishes “virtual currency” as a “digital asset… not recognized as legal tender” and allows banks to provide custodial services for such fake money.
HB 1091 also takes a moment (Section 14) to exempt Bitcoin players from having to get licenses for engaging in money transmission… even though HB 1091 doesn’t make virtual currency into real money, so swapping those IOUs in your favorite dark-web chat room still wouldn’t count as money transmission.
Rep. Pischke had better be careful: as it stands, his Bitcoins or whatever other fake money he plays with online may make it easier for him to hide his income. Codify virtual currency into a bankable asset, and the courts may start making all of Piuschke’s angry-dad constituents count their magic virtual currency interest toward their child-support payments.
If I can’t get groceries with it, it ain’t money. If it doesn’t have the backing of the United States Federal Government and We the People on it, I’m not taking it… and, Legislature, neither should you. Don’t waste committee time discussing Monopoly money; hit Delete on Pischke’s digital currency and focus your limited Legislative time talking about real money.
You’ve got to catch up with Wyoming, Cory.
I have yet to hear a good argument for why anyone should use virtual currency. More than anything it just seems like it is just a way to do illegal activity (drug deals, gun running) and get paid for it.
No ‘catching up’ necessary at all, Mark. Monopoly money is fake and allowing bit-coin into our banking law would only benefit the trust agency to hide more money away from taxes and the good of society.
Notice that when we should be talking about how to improve real wages for all South Dakotans, Republicans like Pischke want to put fake money in our pockets.
Hackers who take over computer systems and demand ransom typically use bitcoin. Why would Rep. Pischke want to promote fake money that facilitates a surging form of crime?
I hope someone will bring just three articles on digital currency’s role in online crime to the House Commerce and Energy hearing and just grill Pischke on the details of his bill. Let’s see just how well informed Pischke is about what he wants to unleash into South Dakota’s banking system.
The sixth-largest bank in the world, HSBC, banned cryptocurrency transfers this month. Citibank is helping governments create sovereign digital currencies, but that’s not monopoly money from some private player.