On May 7th, I chaired the first meeting of the Blockchain Advisory Committee, a subcommittee of the Joint Commission on Technology and Science. Why, you might ask, would I be named Chairman of this subcommittee when, as you are surely aware, I am not a member of JCOTS itself? This is unusual, but it is not unprecedented – and there is a good reason for it. 

In 2024, my first legislative session as a State Senator, I passed SB 439 calling for JCOTS to conduct an analysis of blockchain technology and cryptocurrency in the Commonwealth. After studying the issue, the members of JCOTS determined that a workgroup should be assembled to study this matter on a continuing basis – and that I, as the Senator who requested the analysis, should lead the effort. Members of JCOTS include some of our most experienced legislators who have been working for many years to encourage the adoption of new technologies in the Commonwealth, so I am honored to be joining them in this endeavor. 

Cryptocurrency has been publicly traded for years now, with folks in some industries even receiving their salaries in cryptocurrency. New York City’s mayor recently declared he wants his city to become the crypto capital of the globe, and legislation has been introduced in New York’s statehouse to allow payment of taxes in cryptocurrency. At the same time, Americans are struggling to understand President Trump’s foray into cryptocurrency, with one Democratic Senator labeling his recent dinner for holders of Trump’s coin “the crypto corruption club.” 

I always remind folks that it is important to distinguish between blockchain technology, which can potentially be used for many things, and cryptocurrency, which is one particular use of blockchain. While the blockchain technology concept may be hard for folks to wrap their heads around, cryptocurrency is a thing of value and a medium of exchange just like traditional currencies. The financial system’s move towards virtual assets and digital currencies has been happening for decades, even before the appearance of the first cryptocurrencies in the 2000s. Transactions that were once conducted by cash or check now happen with touchless cards or phone apps. Investing is far more accessible than it was in the days when you had to have a stock broker who would take your phone call. The role of government is not to decide what technology should or shouldn’t be created, but to determine how new technologies can be used consistent with our values – and what regulation or oversight is necessary to protect people’s rights. I look forward to leading this advisory committee in discussing how the people of Virginia can benefit from new technologies. 

That’s why I was dismayed to learn that the budget being considered by the House of Representatives would impose a ten year ban on any state regulation of the emerging Artificial Intelligence industry. AI is outside the mandate of my subcommittee, but these industries have much in common, including their reliance on data centers. The General Assembly has been hard at work for five years working with the data center industry to balance their energy demands and ecological impacts with the benefits the industry brings to Virginians. If this budget passes with this provision, what happens to our existing regulations of data centers that serve customers in AI? If this provision is allowed to pass, what other industries will the current majorities in Congress decide to protect from state oversight? 

States need to be able to regulate business in order for businesses and regulatory regimes both to adapt and thrive. While industry may struggle to negotiate with regulators in states with higher regulatory barriers like California and New York, they have real leverage in their negotiations because of their ability to relocate to another state – and other states have a real opportunity to attract industries with good paying jobs if they can construct a more favorable regulatory regime consistent with their values. When the federal government hands down regulations, that’s it – and businesses that can’t or won’t comply are driven offshore, where they may be totally unregulated. Federal regulations in general should set the floor of what is acceptable consistent with our values, and statehouses should work closely with the industries who employ and do business with their people. 

For these reasons I was proud to cosign a letter with Delegate Maldonado and 21 members of the General Assembly calling for the United States Senate to object to this provision and reaffirm the role of statehouses in our system of government. Senator Tim Kaine has often said one of the biggest parts of his job is to take our good ideas from Virginia and introduce them to the whole country. The idea of the fifty states as fifty laboratories of democracy is not just a corny saying among political academics, it is a real part of how our federal system functions. With President Trump seeking to reshape the role of the federal government, it is more important than ever that states have the ability to innovate and adapt, and I expect the United States Senate will agree.