logo
This is how we protect US dollar dominance in the digital age

This is how we protect US dollar dominance in the digital age

Fox News21-03-2025

History will record Washington's embrace of digital assets this year as an inflection point for the next era of U.S. dollar dominance. Both the Trump administration and Congress are prioritizing an America First approach to the blockchain, ensuring we are the ones defining how these new digital assets are used, traded and created at home and abroad.
Our opportunity now is to ensure that we shape this trend to serve American businesses and families. If the dollar is to be the currency of the digital age, then Washington must act to make that happen.
The good news is that durable, bipartisan progress is emerging. The Senate Banking Committee just advanced first-of-its-kind legislation for one key part of the blockchain ecosystem – stablecoins – in a landslide 18-6 vote. The House appears ready to follow with its version.
This congressional push reflects a shared national imperative for economic and technology competitiveness. Stablecoins are digital dollars that move securely, instantly and freely on blockchain networks. These are not cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin that have significant price volatility. Stablecoins are fully reserved assets, meaning their value is always pegged one-for-one with the U.S. dollar.
Stablecoins are also a key tool in modernizing the dollar for the digital age by making all types of transactions cheaper, safer and more efficient. If regulated properly, they can cement the U.S. dollar as the most widely used currency for the fast-growing internet financial system – enshrining American economic strength for the next generation in the process. President Trump said as much at the Blockworks Digital Assets Summit, calling on Congress to pass "common-sense" legislation and affirming dollar-backed stablecoins will "unleash an explosion of economic growth, and … expand the dominance of the U.S. dollar."
This shift in U.S. financial policy toward the blockchain may seem sudden, but it has been years in the making, dating back to when I served in the first Trump administration. And it reflects the structural trend of digitization that has already reshaped every sector aside from finance over the past few decades.
As White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks explained, "Financial assets are destined to become digital like every other analog industry has become digital and we want that value creation to happen in the United States."
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) recently reinforced this shift by announcing that national banks can issue and process stablecoins, marking a major step toward integrating these digital dollars into the traditional banking system.
This move legitimizes stablecoins as a core component of the U.S. financial infrastructure and provides regulated institutions with clarity to operate in this market. Importantly, stablecoins can serve this role only if they are subject to clear federal rules about reserves, transparency, one-for-one redeemability – key features that inspire trust.
Thankfully, the bills moving in both houses of Congress are promising. Any good law would ensure that consumers are shielded from tokens masquerading as payment stablecoins that do not adhere to U.S. rule of law and oversight.
Stablecoin issuers should be required to publicly disclose their reserves and be open to independent audits to confirm those disclosures. And we should also ensure that American companies compete on a level playing field with offshore issuers and are incentivized to build and grow here in the U.S.
The strength of the U.S. dollar is not just a matter of national pride – it has tangible benefits for American businesses and families. A dominant and stable dollar means lower borrowing costs for businesses and homeowners, as global demand for dollar-denominated assets helps keep interest rates lower. It also translates into dramatically more efficient point-of-sale for merchants, reducing costs for retailers and consumers.
A strong dollar helps curb inflation by making imports more affordable, ensuring that American households retain more of their purchasing power. When the dollar remains the global standard, American workers and businesses benefit from easier access to capital and trade opportunities, reinforcing U.S. economic leadership.
The effort to futureproof the U.S. dollar for the digital age is a rare issue that resonates across the political spectrum. For Republicans, it strengthens U.S. innovation and competitiveness against global adversaries. For Democrats, it represents an opportunity to modernize financial infrastructure, promote economic inclusion, and ensure strong consumer protections.
Both sides recognize that a well-regulated stablecoin framework can reinforce the dollar's role in global finance while safeguarding economic security at home.
Stablecoins are not just a technological breakthrough; they represent an evolution in the very fabric of global finance. If harnessed correctly, they will secure the dollar's preeminence for generations to come.
With strategic vision and regulatory clarity, the U.S. can seize this opportunity and ensure that the dollar remains the anchor of the international monetary system in the digital age. This could be another legacy moment for President Donald Trump and congressional leaders.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

S.F. protesters rally against ICE raids and Trump's deployment of National Guard
S.F. protesters rally against ICE raids and Trump's deployment of National Guard

San Francisco Chronicle​

time39 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

S.F. protesters rally against ICE raids and Trump's deployment of National Guard

The Bay Area resistance to President Donald Trump's immigration raids escalated Sunday as hundreds of protesters in San Francisco denounced his extraordinary deployment of federal troops to quell protests hundreds of miles away in Southern California. Demonstrators gathered about 6 p.m. near a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office downtown to express solidarity with those in Los Angeles County who have rallied against immigration agents targeting people for deportation at businesses and court hearings. In response to the protests, Trump on Saturday announced that he would send 2,000 National Guard soldiers to Los Angeles. After troops arrived in Los Angeles on Sunday, protesters blocked traffic on Highway 101 and reportedly set autonomous vehicles on fire as authorities fired tear gas and declared an unlawful assembly. Dozens of people were arrested over the weekend. In San Francisco, organizers said before their show of solidarity that they didn't want to wait for federal agents to 'descend and tear apart our communities.' The demonstration came days after advocates reported that at least 15 people, including children as young as 3 years old, were detained during scheduled check-ins at the San Francisco ICE office. About 500 protesters gathered peacefully on Sunday outside the ICE building on the corner of Washington and Sansome streets, shutting down the intersection. 'When immigrants are under attack, what do we do?' a demonstrator shouted through a megaphone. 'Stand up, fight back,' the crowd chanted. Signs in the crowd read: 'F— ICE, immigrants are welcome here, 'Stop ICE raids, don't break up immigrant families,' 'Immigration built this nation' and 'No one is illegal on stolen land.' The National Guard deployment by Trump intensified a feud with California that has simmered throughout the early months of his second term in the White House. It's the first time in 60 years that a president has deployed the National Guard without the request of a state governor, but the circumstances are far different. When President Lyndon Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect a 1965 civil rights march led by the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., he did so because the state's segregationist governor had declined to send in the Guard. In this instance, Trump overrode the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said there was 'no unmet need' for additional law enforcement in Los Angeles. Newsom on Sunday urged Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to rescind what the governor called an 'unlawful deployment of troops.' 'We didn't have a problem until Trump got involved,' Newsom said in a social media post. 'This is a serious breach of state sovereignty — inflaming tensions while pulling resources from where they're actually needed.' Hegseth and Trump, however, have shown no indication that they will back down anytime soon. Hegseth on Saturday threatened to send Marines stationed at Camp Pendleton in San Diego County to help crack down on Southern California protests — an idea that Newsom called 'deranged.' Trump, for his part, wrote on his social media website Sunday that Los Angeles had been 'invaded and occupied' by undocumented immigrants and criminals and that 'lawless riots' in the city would 'only strengthen our resolve.' Trump said he had directed his administration to 'to take all such action necessary to liberate Los Angeles.' 'Order will be restored, the Illegals will be expelled, and Los Angeles will be set free,' he said.

Judge declines to block Trump's Corporation for Public Broadcasting board firings
Judge declines to block Trump's Corporation for Public Broadcasting board firings

Yahoo

time40 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Judge declines to block Trump's Corporation for Public Broadcasting board firings

Correction: A previous version of this article gave incorrect names of the fired CPB board members. They are Laura Ross, Diane Kaplan and Thomas Rothman. A federal judge on Sunday declined to block President Trump's removal of three board members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), ruling the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a strong likelihood the firings were unlawful or that they would suffer irreparable harm. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington, D.C., rejected a request for a preliminary injunction filed by the three board members — Laura Ross, Diane Kaplan and Thomas Rothman — who sued the Trump administration after receiving termination notices via email on April 28. In the lawsuit, the CPB board members argued the president lacked the authority to remove them from their position and noted that the corporation, which was created by Congress in 1967, was designed to be protected from political interference. It is the largest single source of funding for public news outlets, including PBS and NPR. 'The credible and urgent threats facing CPB, as a result of the Correspondence are not speculative or theoretical. To the contrary, such threats are well-grounded in the administration's recent terminations of board members at other congressionally-created organizations,' they argued in the lawsuit. Moss was not convinced Trump's move would bring about any immediate, irreparable harm, and he indicated Trump may indeed have the authority to remove them. 'For present purposes and on the present record, it is enough to conclude that Plaintiffs have failed to carry their burden of demonstrating that they are likely to prevail on the merits of their claim for injunctive relief or that Plaintiffs are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief,' the judge's opinion reads. The suit comes as Trump has urged Congress to defund public broadcasters and his Federal Communications Commission chair has vowed to investigate outlets like NPR and PBS over their donation models and perceived editorial bias. Trump and his allies have long said public broadcasters are biased against conservatives and that taxpayers should not have to underwrite their operations. Patricia Harrison, president and CEO of CPB, said it was pleased by part of the ruling, despite failing to win an injunction. 'We are very pleased that the Court recognized CPB is an independent, nonprofit corporation, free from governmental control or influence,' she said in a statement. 'CPB, board and management, look forward to continuing our work with policymakers and other stakeholders to ensure accurate, unbiased and nonpartisan public media is available for all Americans.' Updated: 7:33 p.m. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Bernie Sanders urges Democrats not to work with ‘right-wing extremist' Musk after Trump fallout
Bernie Sanders urges Democrats not to work with ‘right-wing extremist' Musk after Trump fallout

Yahoo

time40 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Bernie Sanders urges Democrats not to work with ‘right-wing extremist' Musk after Trump fallout

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., ruled out the idea that Democrats should work with Elon Musk after his explosive falling out with President Donald Trump, labeling the Tesla CEO a "right-wing extremist." Musk said that he "strongly supported Obama" but felt that the modern Democratic Party had been "hijacked by extremists" in an April 2022 post on X. "Musk has evolved over the years. My understanding is he actually voted for Obama in 2008. But over the years, he has developed into a right-wing extremist," Sanders told CNN "State of the Union" host Dana Bash after she asked if Democrats should work with the tech billionaire after his "breakup" with Trump. Timeline: Inside The Evolving Relationship Between Trump And Musk From First Term To This Week's Fallout Sanders dismissed the idea out of hand and said Trump and Musk's drama was further proof that the United States was devolving into an oligarchic society. The self-proclaimed democratic socialist dismissed the episode as a fight among oligarchs, and slammed it as an "embarrassment" to people who believe in democracy and the rule of law. "Musk said to Trump, 'hey listen, I spent $270 million to get you elected. I bought you the presidency because we have a corrupt campaign finance system and billionaires can do that.' And Trump said, 'well, I gave you the right to run the government for three or four months, but I don't like the guy you want to run NASA, and we're going to get rid of him' and Musk got upset," Sanders said. Read On The Fox News App Musk endorsed Trump after he survived his assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, and subsequently served as one of his top surrogates and spent hundreds of millions of dollars to get him elected. Trump selected Musk to serve as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and tasked him with cutting waste, fraud and abuse from the federal bureaucracy. Musk's tenure at DOGE was tumultuous. Although he found billions of dollars in spending cuts, his reductions in federal outlays fell far short of the trillion dollars he promised. Backlash to Musk's work within the administration caused his businesses to suffer. Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture Trump and Musk's relationship took a turn for the worse after the president withdrew Musk-ally Jared Isaacman's nomination to lead NASA. Musk proceeded to trash the "big beautiful bill" Trump is trying to get through Congress, claiming Trump only won because he donated $270 million to aid his campaign and alleging, without proof, that the president is featured in the so-called Epstein files in an X post he subsequently deleted. Trump warned that Musk will have to face "very serious consequences" if he funds Democratic candidates as a result of their rupture. When asked by Bash if he feels that Musk is correct in claiming that Trump only won because of Musk's money, Sanders responded article source: Bernie Sanders urges Democrats not to work with 'right-wing extremist' Musk after Trump fallout

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store