10 Oct
10Oct

A proposal in Massachusetts to create a state-backed Bitcoin strategic reserve met with a muted reception from state lawmakers during its first public hearing in eight months.

The bill, introduced by Republican State Senator Peter Durant and presented to the Joint Committee on Revenue, seeks to authorize the state treasury to allocate up to 10% of the multi-billion dollar Commonwealth Stabilization Fund into Bitcoin and other digital assets. It would also allow seized cryptocurrencies to be added to the reserve.

Despite the proposal's potential to enable massive diversification, Durant's presentation was met with complete silence from the committee members, who offered no questions or follow-up inquiries. The committee now has until early December to decide whether to advance the bill.

Durant remains optimistic, stating that he is engaged in ongoing conversations to educate stakeholders and move the legislation forward. The bill was also supported by the Satoshi Action Fund's CEO, Dennis Porter, who argued that Massachusetts, as a historic financial hub, is well-positioned to lead in digital asset initiatives.

Broader Context of State and Federal Reserves

The quiet reception reflects a broader cooling of momentum for state-level Bitcoin reserve efforts, where most of the two dozen bills introduced this year have stalled. While New Hampshire, Arizona, and Texas have successfully established modest reserve frameworks, proposals in several other states have been rejected, largely due to concerns over Bitcoin's volatility and fiscal risk.

The Massachusetts initiative also coincides with rising federal attention to the issue, including a March 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump authorizing a U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve funded by seized BTC, and ongoing federal legislation proposed by Senator Cynthia Lummis. Internationally, countries like Sweden, Kyrgyzstan, and the Philippines are also considering national Bitcoin strategies.

The key feature of the Massachusetts bill is that it would only authorize—not mandate—the state treasury to diversify its stabilization fund, offering a prudent, non-compulsory framework.

October 2025, Cryptoniteuae

Comments
* The email will not be published on the website.