Finance
To Boost Crypto, Break The Federal Grip On Americans’ Financial Rights
Senator Patrick Toomey (R-PA) listens while Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) speaks during a press … [+]
Despite the efforts of a few members of Congress, U.S. cryptocurrency policy remains a mess. For years, the Securities and Exchange Commission, most federal banking agencies, and many members of Congress have been outright hostile toward crypto.
But due to several new proposals, many crypto supporters are hopeful this hostility will fade. Over the last few weeks, Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), former President Donald Trump, and presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., all announced proposals for the U.S. to create a bitcoin reserve.
Given the sad current state of U.S. crypto policy, however, it is doubtful these kinds of proposals would get things on track. Still, they provide a great opportunity to have a more fundamental conversation about how to improve crypto policy. To paraphrase my colleague George Selgin, there’s surely a good policy somewhere between the status quo and these reserve proposals.
And it’s vital that Congress finds it.
Crypto enables new forms of digital payments, where users can bypass traditional third-party intermediaries, such as banks and broker-dealers. In other words, it allows for person-to-person electronic transfers of digital assets, including money.
In theory, allowing people to spend money electronically in ways resembling how they’ve been spending cash shouldn’t be controversial, especially in America. Nonetheless, this feature, along with the potentially disruptive nature of crypto, has proven too much for politicians to overcome.
Some people don’t like that crypto is a competitive threat to companies in the traditional payments industry. Others don’t like that it’s a threat to the existing anti-money laundering regime. (That’s an especially big problem because the federal government has drafted traditional financial institutions to act as an extension of law enforcement.) Other critics see bypassing these systems as a threat to the U.S. dollar itself.
The specter of these threats has made it difficult to develop sound cryptocurrency policy, but there are two basic principles—principles that have been foundational to the United States—that can help Congress address these concerns.
The first one relates to the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects Americans against warrantless searches and seizures by the government. Thanks to the Bank Secrecy Act and its many amendments, Fourth Amendment protections have been all but eliminated when it comes to Americans’ financial records. The BSA gives law enforcement warrantless access to Americans’ financial records when they use a bank or any other financial institution.
Rather than adapt to the technology, many policymakers want to force crypto to adapt to a system that was designed to work with financial intermediaries. But crypto often upends the traditional role of intermediaries, thus forcing Congress to deal with how it has used those intermediaries to end-run the Fourth Amendment.
Many members of Congress (and the financial industry) now view the Fourth Amendment as a relic, somewhere between overly burdensome and an afterthought, unapplicable to modern America. But the Fourth Amendment was never supposed to be perfect. It represents, instead, the necessarily imperfect balance between the competing interests of individuals’ financial privacy and the government’s ability to gather evidence of a crime.
Reaffirming Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights, as Congress should do, would not be a license to commit crime. It would simply mean that law enforcement must demonstrate probable cause to a judge before accessing Americans’ financial records, just as they do for other searches.
The second principle—limited government—dictates that people, not government officials, are generally the best judges of which economic transactions are in their own best interest. Yet, the federal government now dictates which methods of payments are acceptable, which special institutions may facilitate those payments, and how those institutions may operate. Some members of Congress even want cryptocurrency banned because it doesn’t fit into this government regime.
The principle of limited government also answers the critics who see crypto as a threat to the U.S. dollar. The federal government is not supposed to be the provider of Americans’ money precisely because governments tend to debase currency. The U.S. government is supposed to refrain from debasing people’s money, and to protect people’s right to use money as they see fit. The government is not supposed to control every aspect of how people use their money or even what they use for money.
Critics of crypto assume that the government’s existing monopoly on money issuance maintains the dollar standard itself, but that’s incorrect. The prevalence of the U.S. dollar grew when gold and silver were recognized as money, and it does not depend on a specific type of paper currency or digital entries. The prevalence of the U.S. dollar derives from the country’s relatively strong legal and economic systems, especially as they pertain to protecting individual property rights.
Many advocates of cryptocurrency are frustrated because the federal government has failed to uphold these limited government principles and debased the currency. Americans now have effectively one choice for money, and even the person-to-person transfer of that currency is now highly regulated and surveilled.
So, it makes sense that so many crypto proponents are cheering on these reserve proposals in the hope that they will gain wider acceptance for Bitcoin. Unfortunately, these proposals do not directly address the underlying problems that have kept U.S. crypto policy such a mess.
Cryptocurrency will remain of limited use until Congress pares back the overly invasive regulatory framework that currently governs U.S. financial markets. To do so, Congress need only reaffirm the importance of the Fourth Amendment and a limited government.
Before seeking a new referendum MPS needs to rebuild trust in the community through completing state audits, putting in place controls to prevent overspending and routine reports to the public.
For MPS Superintendent Brenda Cassellius, who just wrapped up her first year leading Milwaukee’s public school system, her tenure has been punctuated by some very big numbers.
The first is $252 million. That is the amount of new spending voters narrowly approved in an April 2024 referendum to support operations in Wisconsin’s largest school district. Just months later, MPS was rocked by revelations the district was months behind in filing key financial reports to the state, which led to former Superintendent Keith Posley’s resignation.
The second is $1 billion. MPS faces a deferred maintenance backlog exceeding $1 billion. The district’s enrollment has declined 30% over the last 30 years, leaving many schools at less than 50% full. That, in part, is driving a plan to close some schools and to improve others to help lower costs.
The final is $46 million, the deficit MPS was running for the 2024-25 school year, an unexpected shortfall which has led to hundreds of staff layoffs.
Getting the district’s accounting, budgeting and financial reporting back on track has dominated Cassellius’s first year at MPS. In an April 15 interview with the Journal Sentinel’s editorial board, she talked in detail about the challenges putting that into order and progress she sees in restoring transparency into its operations.
State funding and aging buildings create budget nightmares
Cassellius says state needs to keep up its share of school funding
In an interview with the Journal Sentinel editorial board, MPS leader Brenda Cassellius says budgets and buildings are her two top worries.
Cassellius said the on-going budget crisis is her top concern. She said the state’s failure to live up to its share of funding is exacerbating MPS’ budget woes. A group of school districts, teachers and parents filed suit against the state Legislature and its Joint Finance Committee claiming the current state funding system is unconstitutional and prevents schools from meeting students’ educational needs.
Funding for special education is especially critical. About 20% of MPS students have disabilities, almost twice the share of the city’s charter schools, and the average of 14% across Wisconsin.
“What’s keeping me up now, you know, is really just the budget crisis we’re in, with not only this year but multiple years going out without additional state aid, we’ve been not getting funding for what our needs are for our students, and particularly our students with special needs,” she said.
Although the state budget increased special education funding to a 42% reimbursement rate, the actual rate has been about 35%. Another component to the budget headache is the age of MPS buildings. The average age is 85 years-old compared to 45 across the nation.
“We have just kicked this can down the curb or kicked it down the street or whatever you call it for too long. And it’s time that we really take on a serious conversation about the conditions of the learning environments in which we send our children,” she said. “Particularly in Milwaukee Public Schools, we serve the most vulnerable children. Children who have language barriers, children who have disabilities, children in high-concentrated poverty.”
What needs to happen before MPS seeks another referendum
Voters need to be comfortable MPS has made tough budget decisions
In an interview with Journal Sentinel editorial board, Brenda Cassellius said voters will need to see budget improvements before seeking more spending
Cassellius said MPS will definitely need to go back to voters for a new referendum in the future. In addition to the 2024 measure, voters approved an $87 million plan in 2020.
Before doing that, she said the district first needs to rebuild trust in the community through completing required state audits, putting into place controls to prevent overspending and routine reports to the school board and public about finances.
“I don’t think that the voters are going to want us to bring something forward until they feel comfortable that we have done the cleanup that is necessary,” she said. “And we’ve built the trust that we have the sufficient controls in place.”
In the interim, she’s hoping the state will meet its constitutional responsibility to adequately fund public schools.
“What the public expects is you know where the money is, you’re spending it as close as you can to children, you’re getting good on the promise around art, music, and PE, and the things the public said they wanted to fund,” Cassellius said. “And they want their kids to have so that they have a quality education and an excellent education in Milwaukee Public Schools, and that they had the right amount of staff that they actually need. In the school to be safe and to run a good operation.”
Rebuilding finance staff in wake of $46 million in overspending
MPS is rebuilding school finance staff in wake of reporting lapses
In an interview with the Journal Sentinel editorial board April 15, MPS superintendent discusses accountability for district’s financial problems.
The $46 million budget shortfall from the 2024-25 school year started coming into view last fall and was confirmed in mid-January. Cassellius noted that in addition to hiring a new superintendent, MPS also parted ways with its comptroller and CFO.
“We are really rebuilding the personnel and staff of the finance department. That is what’s critical, is having the right people in the right seats doing the work,” she said. “Also critical is making sure that you have the right controls in place. The audit findings found that we did not have proper controls in place and now we have those proper controls in place and when we find things we put new SOPs in place and that is what any business does.”
Identifying that shortfall, though painful, was the result of better accounting.
“Being three years behind in auditing means that you don’t have full sight on your actual revenues and expenditures. And so we have now full sight of our revenues and our expenditures and that’s why we were able to see this new deficit of $46 million,” she said. “And we still continue to work with DPI on those processes to make sure that every month we’re doing monthly to actuals and doing those accounting, reporting that to the board. In a way that is consumable to the public that they can understand.”
Jim Fitzhenry is the Ideas Lab Editor/Director of Community Engagement for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Reach him at jfitzhen@gannett.com or 920-993-7154.
Property markets move in cycles, and with interest rates rising and other pressures like high fuel costs, some markets are clearly slowing down. Many first-home buyers who have only ever seen markets going up are conditioned to think that when purchasing, competition is always intense and decisions need to be made quickly.
In those times, buyers often feel they need to act fast, stretch their budget and secure a property at almost any cost. But things have definitely changed.
In a softer market, the dynamic shifts. Properties take longer to sell, competition thins, and it’s the vendors who begin to feel pressure.
RELATED
For buyers who understand how to navigate that change, the balance of power quickly moves in their favour. The opportunity is not simply to buy at a lower price. It is to negotiate from a position of strength.
If that’s you right now, these are the key skills first-home buyers need to take advantage of in softer market conditions.
The most important shift in a soft market is psychological. In a rising market, buyers often feel like they are competing for limited opportunities. In a softer market, the opposite is true. There are more properties available, fewer active buyers and less urgency overall. This gives buyers options.
When buyers understand that they are not competing with multiple parties on every property, their decision-making improves. They are more willing to walk away, compare opportunities and avoid overpaying. Negotiation strength comes from not needing to transact immediately. When that pressure is removed, buyers are able to engage more strategically.
One of the most common mistakes first-home buyers make is continuing to apply strategies that only work in rising markets. Auction urgency is a clear example. In strong markets, auctions often attract multiple bidders and create competitive tension. In softer conditions, properties are more likely to pass in, shifting the process away from a public bidding environment into a private negotiation.
This is where leverage increases.
Private negotiations allow buyers to introduce conditions that protect their position. These may include finance clauses, longer settlement periods or price adjustments based on due diligence. Opportunities that are rarely available in competitive markets become standard in softer ones.
The Board of Visitors Finance Committee met Thursday and approved a 3.6 percent average increase in tuition, a 4.8 percent average increase in meal plan costs and a 5 percent increase in the cost of double-room housing for the 2026-27 school year. The approval was unanimous amongst Board members, though some expressed resistance to the increases before voting in favor of them.
The Committee heard from Jennifer Wagner Davis, executive vice president and chief operating officer, and Donna Price Henry, chancellor of the College at Wise, about reasons for the raise in tuition and rates. According to Davis and Henry, salary increases for professors and legislation passed by the General Assembly contribute to tuition and rates increases.
The Finance Committee, chaired by Vice Rector Victoria Harker, is responsible for the University’s financial affairs and business operations, and the Committee manages the budget, tuition and student fees.
Changes in tuition vary between schools, with the School of Law seeing at most a 5.1 percent increase, the School of Engineering & Applied Science seeing at most a 3.2 percent increase and the College of Arts and Sciences seeing at most a 3.1 percent increase in tuition for the 2026-27 school year.
For the 2026-27 school year at the College at Wise, the Committee also unanimously approved a 2.5 percent average increase in tuition, a 3.8 percent increase in meal plans and a 2 percent increase in the cost of housing.
Last year, the Committee approved a 3 percent average increase in tuition, a 5.5 percent increase in meal plans and a 5.5 percent increase in the cost of housing for the University.
Davis cited increased costs as the primary reason for the approved increase in tuition. She said that the budget that could be passed by the General Assembly for June 30, 2027 through June 30, 2028 could increase professor salaries — University professors receive raises via this process. Davis said that the Senate and House of Delegates have separate proposals dealing with the pay increases that are currently unresolved, with House Bill 30 raising salaries by 2 percent and Senate Bill 30 raising salaries by 3 percent.
Davis said every percent increase in faculty salaries costs the University $15 million annually, and the Commonwealth will increase funding to the University by $1-2 million to help pay for that increase. According to Davis, the most common way to stabilize the budgetary imbalance caused by raised salaries is through tuition raises.
Beyond the increase in salary, Davis cited the minimum wage increase, inflation and Virginia Military Survivors & Dependents Education Program as increased costs to the University. VMSDEP is a program that gives education benefits to spouses and children of disabled veterans or military service members killed, missing in action or taken prisoner. Davis said that the program is “partially unfunded” and could cost the University somewhere between $3.6 to $6 million, depending on how many students qualify for the program.
Davis spoke on other contributing factors to the increase in tuition, specifically collective bargaining — which allows workers to bargain for better wages and working conditions.
“If we look at other institutions or other states that have collective bargaining, [collective bargaining] does put an upward pressure on tuition,” Davis said.
Prior to Thursday’s meeting, the Committee heard the proposal for tuition increases from Davis and Henry April 6 in a Finance Committee tuition workshop with public comment. During the tuition workshop, tuition increases ranged from 3 to 4.5 percent for the University and 2 to 3 percent for the College at Wise. Both increases approved Thursday are within the ranges originally proposed.
Meal plan costs, on average, will be increasing by 4.8 percent in the upcoming academic year. Davis said that the University has been expanding dining options with the opening of the Gaston House and new locations for the Ivy Corridor student housing that is still in progress. She also said that the University has been taking steps to increase the availability of allergen-friendly food options.
Davis shared that the 5 percent cost increase in housing is due to the expansion of student housing in the Ivy Corridor. Davis also said that there will be 3,000 new units added to the Charlottesville housing market by 2027, of which 780 beds will be for University housing. Davis said that she hopes the Ivy Corridor housing would “free up” the city housing supply by having more students live on Grounds.
Board member Amanda Pillion said she was “concerned” about how tuition increases would harm rural families — she said the constant increases in cost could make a University education out of reach for middle-income Virginians.
“This is the second governor I’ve served under. Both times I’ve heard affordability, affordability, affordability,” Pillion said. “We need to really be conscious of the fact that … there is a large group of people that [are middle-income] that these increases [in tuition and fees] are really tough for.”
The Committee also approved a renovation for The Park — an 18-acre recreational hub in North Grounds — which will cost $10 million. As part of the renovation, The Park will include a maintenance facility, storm water systems and a maintenance access route. Davis said the renovation will address safety and security issues for the 200 people that use The Park daily. According to Davis, the University will use $2 million of institutional funds and issue $8 million of debt to fund the renovation.
The Finance Committee will reconvene during the regularly scheduled June Board meetings.
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoGame 21: Tigers at Red Sox, Garrett Crochet battles both Detroit and the weather
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoWhy do gray whales keep dying in San Francisco’s waters?
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoDallas Mavericks Owners Might Be Making Big Mistake in Search for New GM
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoDefense dominates, Mensah flashes in Miami’s spring game – The Miami Hurricane
-
Boston, MA2 hours ago
A crowd scientist is helping the Boston Marathon manage a growing field of 30,000-plus runners
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoDenver Nuggets Altitude broadcasts now being offered in Spanish for first time ever
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoNeed to shred? Free drive-up/ride-up shredding Wednesday at Village Green West Seattle
-
San Diego, CA2 hours agoGame 21: San Diego Padres at Los Angeles Angels
