Massachusetts lawmakers are preparing to hold a public hearing on October 7 to consider whether the state should establish its own Bitcoin reserve, placing it in the middle of a growing national conversation over the role of digital assets in government treasuries.
The proposal, filed in February by Republican state Senator Peter Durant, calls for the creation of a “Commonwealth Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.”
If enacted, the law would direct any Bitcoin or other digital assets seized by the state into the reserve and authorize the treasurer to allocate up to 10% of the Commonwealth Stabilization Fund toward purchasing cryptocurrency.
Political reality check
Despite its ambitious framing, the legislation faces steep political hurdles. Democrats hold a supermajority in both the Massachusetts House and Senate, as well as the governor’s office, making it difficult for a Republican-sponsored crypto bill to advance. All of Massachusetts’ federal representatives are also Democrats, underscoring the partisan imbalance.
The bill also includes requirements for secure custody arrangements and regular audits, signaling an attempt to address concerns about the risks of managing highly volatile digital assets. As noted in the text of Senate Bill S.1967, the treasurer would be required to use secure, verifiable custody solutions for all holdings.
Observers suggest that while the bill is unlikely to pass, it highlights a broader Republican-led push at the state level to integrate Bitcoin into public finance strategies.
A national trend gains ground
At the federal level, President Donald Trump signed an executive order in March 2025 establishing a national Bitcoin and cryptocurrency reserve, largely stocked through seized assets.
Even if Massachusetts’ bill faces long odds, it joins a growing list of state and federal initiatives that treat Bitcoin as more than just a speculative asset.
Earlier this year, Texas has taken decisive steps, passing legislation earlier this year to formally establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and positioning itself as a pioneer in state-level crypto adoption, and Florida, for example, once entertained similar ambitions, but its efforts have largely fizzled out amid political infighting and shifting policy priorities.
Other states remain divided.
While Montana, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming have rejected or shelved similar proposals, lawmakers in Michigan and Ohio are still weighing whether to adopt legislation that would authorize their treasuries to hold Bitcoin.
Bitcoin as a hedge
The state-level debate comes at a time when companies with significant exposure to digital assets, such as Michael Saylor’s Company Strategy, continue to accumulate Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation and macroeconomic instability.
Proponents argue that governments could benefit from similar strategies, turning crypto into a reserve asset that strengthens balance sheets over time.
Still, critics warn of volatility risks and question whether taxpayer funds should be tied to assets that can swing wildly in value. The Massachusetts bill’s call for a 10% allocation of the stabilization fund has drawn particular scrutiny, given its role in protecting the state budget during downturns.
Roman Zaika
Disclaimer: All materials on this site are for informational purposes only. None of the material should be interpreted as investment advice. Please note that despite the nature of much of the material created and hosted on this website, HODL FM is not a financial reference resource, and the opinions of authors and other contributors are their own and should not be taken as financial advice. If you require advice. HODL FM strongly recommends contacting a qualified industry professional.
