News

In Washington, debate has erupted over a bill that, despite its stated focus on housing, contains a significant financial provision—a restriction on the issuance of a digital dollar. The bill, which received significant support in both houses of Congress, was sent to the White House for approval, but President Donald Trump expressed his intention not to sign it. The reason for this decision, it turns out, lies not in the housing sector, but in political maneuvering related to election law.  

The essence of the financial part of the initiative is as follows: the Federal Reserve System (FRS) is deprived of the right to issue a digital dollar or any other asset that could be classified as central bank currency until 2030. After this date, the Federal Reserve will be able to issue funds only with the express approval of Congress. However, private stablecoins pegged to the US dollar remain exempt from the ban. Thus, lawmakers are deliberately leaving room for market developments while putting the government project on hold for an extended period. 

Nevertheless, having received the bill, Trump decided to use this opportunity to advance his long-standing initiative—tightening election rules. He demanded the simultaneous passage of the SAVE America Act, which requires voters to present photo ID and proof of citizenship when registering. In a statement on the social media platform TruthSocial, the president emphasized that he would not sign the legislation in protest of the Senate's inaction on the measure. He also warned that voting against the initiative would have serious consequences for any politician. Thus, two completely different issues—monetary policy and electoral procedures—have become closely linked in the president's position. 

Trump is formally using his constitutional veto power as leverage over legislators, although procedural nuances call into question the effectiveness of such a move. According to the US Constitution, the president has ten working days to sign or veto a bill. If the head of state takes no action during this period, the document automatically becomes law. In this case, Trump has openly declared his intention not to sign the bill, but this does not guarantee a definitive block. The results of the vote in Congress indicate strong support for the bill. In the House of Representatives, 358 votes were in favor, 32 against, and 85 votes to 5 in the Senate. This vote ratio significantly exceeds the two-thirds majority required to override a presidential veto in each chamber. This means that even if Trump formally vetoes the bill, Congress has every opportunity to override it and enact the legislation without the president's signature.  

The ban on a digital dollar, which could have gone unnoticed as a technical regulation, has become the center of a political scandal and a bargaining chip. At the same time, the strong majority in Congress makes the presidential ultimatum more of a rhetorical gesture than a real threat.  

Ultimately, if Trump does not sign the document, Congress will likely exercise its right to override the veto. This means the digital dollar will remain banned until at least the early 2030s, while private stablecoins will continue to develop without any restrictions.