Is the United States implementing a "one country, multiple systems" approach for Bitcoin? Three states are rapidly accumulating BTC, while one state has issued a strict ban!

As the federal-level regulatory framework for Crypto Assets is still under intense debate, a "civil war" over the future of Bitcoin has quietly ignited among the states in the United States. From the East Coast to the West Coast, states are rapidly carving out distinct camps on how to treat this emerging digital asset, creating a complex and divided regulatory landscape. On one side are the proponents, represented by Texas, New Hampshire, and Arizona, who are actively legislating to incorporate Bitcoin into state-level strategic reserves, viewing it as "digital gold" in the fight against inflation and to attract innovation. On the other side is the staunch opposition, led by Connecticut, which has passed the country's first strict ban on government investment or holding of any virtual currency, attempting to build a firewall between public finance and the crypto world. Between these two extremes, there are explorers like Louisiana, who have opted for a more cautious "research first" approach. This divergence in state-level policy not only profoundly affects the future of the U.S. crypto industry but also serves as a key window for the world to observe how Bitcoin integrates into the traditional system. Crypto Assets Civil War?

Among the supporters of Bitcoin, the actions of Texas are undoubtedly the most indicative. As the second largest economy in the United States (with an estimated GDP of about $2.7 trillion in 2024), Texas Governor Greg Abbott has recently officially signed Senate Bill 21 (SB21), turning it into law. The passage of this "Bitcoin Reserve Act" marks Texas's formal entry into the ranks of state-level Bitcoin reserves. The core content of the SB21 bill includes: Authorization to establish a reserve fund: Authorizes the Texas Comptroller's Office to manage a dedicated strategic reserve fund for investing in Crypto Assets. Strict investment criteria: Allows state funds to be invested in Crypto Assets with a "market capitalization exceeding $500 billion for 24 consecutive months." Currently, only Bitcoin (with a market capitalization exceeding $2 trillion) meets this strict criterion. Independent fund management: The reserve is a special fund "outside the state treasury," preventing it from being diverted for other uses. Its funding sources are diverse, including legislative appropriations, special revenues, Crypto Assets acquired through purchases or received from forks/airdrops, investment returns, and donations from the public and private sectors. Security and governance: The bill explicitly requires the state treasury accountant to safeguard this fund through "cold wallets" to protect assets from cyber threats. At the same time, a five-member advisory committee will be established to oversee and mitigate investment risks. Lee Bratcher, the chairman of the Texas Blockchain Council, predicts that Texas may initially invest "tens of millions of dollars" into the fund. Supporters believe that this move is not only a forward-looking strategy for Texas to combat inflation and diversify its assets financially, but also a key step in solidifying its leading position in digital asset innovation. Texas is not fighting alone. As early as the beginning of May this year, New Hampshire took the lead in issuing a similar Bitcoin reserve law, becoming the first in the country. Following closely, Arizona, after initially vetoing, also passed a similar proposal on May 10. The actions of these three states clearly indicate a trend: some state governments are seriously considering incorporating Bitcoin as a value storage tool similar to gold into their long-term financial planning.

In stark contrast to the warm embrace of places like Texas, Connecticut has chosen to go against the trend. Recently, the state's legislature overwhelmingly passed Bill HB7082 with a "zero votes against" consensus, setting a precedent as the first in the nation to explicitly prohibit state government involvement in Crypto Assets. The bill, which will take effect on October 1, 2025, is characterized by its strict and comprehensive provisions: Comprehensive prohibition of government participation: The bill clearly states that "state governments and any of their political branches" may not accept or request payments in the form of virtual currency; they may not purchase, hold, invest in, or establish any form of virtual currency reserves, including Bitcoin and stablecoins. Strengthening regulation of the industry: In addition to prohibiting government participation, the bill also imposes stricter requirements on crypto-related businesses operating within the state. All enterprises handling cryptocurrency transactions, including digital wallets, exchanges, and Bitcoin ATMs, must obtain a license issued by the state government. Strict consumer protection: The bill mandates that crypto service providers must hold a 1:1 fund reserve, prohibiting the misappropriation of customer funds. At the same time, they must provide users with clear risk disclosures, warning them about the irreversibility of crypto transactions, and offer additional protection for high-risk users such as the elderly and for large transactions. Furthermore, it is prohibited for payment applications to open accounts for minors without parental consent. The legislative motivation in Connecticut is very clear: to guard against the potential risks that extreme price volatility of crypto assets poses to public funds. This extremely conservative stance makes it the most cautious end of the spectrum of cryptocurrency regulation in the United States. Between the extremes of embrace and prohibition, Louisiana represents a third attitude: cautious exploration. The state's House of Representatives passed a resolution on June 10 to establish a dedicated "task force" to conduct in-depth research on blockchain technology and artificial intelligence. Lawmakers acknowledge that, given that nearly 20% of Americans hold crypto assets, state governments need to understand the opportunities and risks they present. The task of this working group includes: exploring potential application scenarios of blockchain and artificial intelligence; studying the regulatory framework needed to manage their development; and gathering insights from industry experts, businesses, and communities through public hearings. The group will submit its research findings and policy recommendations to the state legislature before February 2026. Louisiana's approach of "planning before acting" reflects a pragmatic attitude of not rushing to conclusions, but rather hoping to make decisions based on a thorough understanding. Multiple systems in one country? The significant divergence in Bitcoin policies among various states in the U.S. is shaping an increasingly fragmented domestic regulatory environment. States like Texas are embracing the opportunity, trying to position themselves as a hotbed for crypto innovation and a safe haven for capital; meanwhile, Connecticut is erecting high walls, which may isolate risks but could also shut out opportunities. This state-level "route dispute" is not just about Bitcoin, but also about the different bets each state is making on the future direction of finance, technology, and economic development. Ultimately, which states can attract more innovative companies, talent, and capital may depend on who can provide a clear regulatory environment that both mitigates risks and encourages innovation more quickly. This Bitcoin policy experiment taking place within the United States will undoubtedly have a profound impact on the global development trends of Crypto Assets.