I wrote a letter to Joni Ernst (and Chuck Grassley) about Bitcoin that you can find here. I have posted Joni’s reply and then my reply to her, trying to correct the many incorrect things she noted in her letter (or her email reply person’s letter). I understand why most people dont’ waste their time contacting their politicians. You never get a straight answer. But unfortunately, beyond voting them out, which is nearly impossible to do as most politicians stay in once elected, the only thing we can do is contact them to try to educate them on topics and encourage others to contact them also. That is why I post my emails with politicians, so others can just copy/paste send them, if they want, to show our politicians that it’s a topic people care about, without making others spend time writing a letter.

Below is Joni Ernst’s reply. 

Dear Mr. Hoogland,

Thank you for reaching out to me regarding digital asset regulation. It is important for me to hear from folks in Iowa on this rapidly evolving topic.

Whether it is Bitcoin, central bank digital currencies, or digital currency exchanges like FTX, digital assets have been a big topic of conversation in Washington. Cryptocurrencies can create new avenues for financial transactions, investments, and other economic activity given they do not rely on a government’s central bank. While digital assets offer new possibilities, there are legitimate concerns we must also address. 

For example, Bitcoin is among the most popular cryptocurrencies, but we do not know who created it or how much of it exists. These uncertainties raise questions as to how legitimate Bitcoin can be as a currency. Further, cryptocurrencies are volatile. We have seen currencies become extremely valuable, and then, in the blink of an eye, lose their value all-together. This volatility raises questions around the extent to which cryptocurrencies may need to be regulated in some form or fashion so as to create more stability for investors.

Additionally, the decentralized nature of digital assets create potential risks related to fraud and illicit activities. We have already seen how bad actors across the world take advantage of the secrecy digital currencies provide in order to commit crimes, fund terrorism, or evade sanctions. 

However, there is much benefit to be had from greater use of technology in the financial system. Cryptocurrencies do open doors for people who may not otherwise have access to capital. Though substantially distinct from digital currencies, the Federal Reserve recently unveiled its new FedNow service to help give people and businesses instant access to their money when they transfer it from account to account. 

As we continue to flesh out the use of digital currencies and technology in finance, we must strike the right balance between fostering innovation, protecting individuals, and limiting the ability of bad actors to abuse the system. 

You may be interested to know, this year’s National Defense Authorization Act included a provision to tighten oversight of financial institutions working with cryptocurrencies and other digital assets. By instituting regulatory clarity while weeding out bad actors, financial institutions can better ensure digital assets are not improperly used. This is just one of many crucial provisions in the annual defense bill that bolsters our national security and sends a clear sign of strength to our adversaries.

Thank you again for reaching out to my office, and please know that I am closely monitoring this situation as it develops. Please feel free to share any additional insights or concerns you may have regarding digital assets as I always enjoy hearing from Iowans. 

Sincerely,

Joni K. Ernst

United States Senator

My reply is below.

Senator – 

Thank you for your reply. I wanted to point out that you didn’t really address any of the specific topics I noted and you even shared some incorrect factual information. It concerns me when my elected Senator (or their email writer/advisor) is so wrong on a very basic topic. 

It is obvious that this is your canned bitcoin/crypto currency response.
I want to emphasize to you there is a fundamental difference between bitcoin and “cryptocurrency”

You can read about the differences in this short blog post .

I asked you to oppose Senator Elizabeth Warren’s “Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act” in particular. You did not mention that bill at all. 

I also encouraged you to learn from Daniel Batten and his work into bitcoin mining reducing methane emissions. You did not mention that at all. 

Flared Methane as a Sustainable Power Source for Cryptocurrency Mining

I also asked you to to learn from Alex Gladstein about the human rights benefits that Bitcoin provides. He has already tried to speak to congress on this.You did not mention that at all. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/07/human-rights-advocates-say-bitcoin-critical-in-authoritarian-countries.html

Are you not interested in the plight of those fleeing authoritarian regimes?

You did mention, unprompted that “Bitcoin is among the most popular cryptocurrencies, but we do not know who created it or how much of it exists.”

While it is true the inventor, Satoshi Nakamato, is unknown, we do know that there will only be 21 million bitcoin ever. This is ingrained in the code.

This is unlike the amount of US dollars of which we truly can’t know how many will ever exist. Every year the US government prints trillions more in new dollars.

While Republicans pay lip service to the budget deficit when Democrats hold the presidency, historically, Republican presidents run even larger budget deficits than Democrats! You are right to fight against deficits but I believe you do it only in word for votes. I don’t believe you have any personal conviction to reduce the deficit.

I encourage you to talk to your fellow Senator, Cynthia Lumis. She seems to understand Bitcoin.