Montana's Bid to Establish a Bitcoin Reserve Hits a Dead End

House Bill No. 429, which proposed investing state funds in Bitcoin, stablecoins, and precious metals, failed to pass a second reading in the state's House of Representatives.

Lawmakers in Montana have rejected a bill that would have authorized the state to invest a portion of its funds in Bitcoin, dealing a blow to efforts to include the cryptocurrency in U.S. state reserves.

House Bill No. 429, which proposed allocating state money in precious metals, Bitcoin, and stablecoins, failed to pass a second reading in the state's House of Representatives on Thursday. The bill was voted down by a margin of 41-59.

The bill would have established a special revenue account for investing in assets like Bitcoin, precious metals, and stablecoins. It proposed a strategic allocation of $50 million by mid-2025.

If passed, the legislation would have made Montana one of the few U.S. states to formally hold Bitcoin as a reserve asset. Several states, including Utah, Arizona, and Oklahoma, have expressed interest in the move.

However, the bill faced opposition within the House, particularly from Republican lawmakers, many of whom expressed skepticism about investing taxpayer money in Bitcoin.

Representative Jane Gillette voiced concerns about the bill’s lack of clarity, stating, “I am not comfortable with this bill and I am definitely not voting for it as a fiscal conservative. I don’t think the bill clearly articulates enough what that money is going to be spent on.”

Representative Steven Kelly had similar concerns, calling Bitcoin “way too risky” as an investment for public funds. He stated that the House's responsibility is to protect taxpayer money, not speculate on volatile assets.

Another Republican lawmaker, Bill Mercer, was also against the proposal. “Taking the hard-earned money from workers across the state and speculating on it is not the right way to go. So, I am gonna be a ‘no’ on this,” he said.

The bill initially had the backing of Montana's House Business and Labor Committee, but this support wasn't enough to carry it through the full House vote.

Despite efforts from Bitcoin-friendly lawmakers, the concerns over risk and accountability ultimately led to its rejection.

While this legislative effort failed, it's unlikely that Montana's exploration of Bitcoin as a reserve asset will end here. Other states are actively considering similar initiatives, and the conversation around digital assets as a strategic financial tool continues to gain traction.

Dennis Porter, CEO of the Satoshi Action Fund, remained optimistic about the growing interest in Bitcoin reserves across the U.S. He noted on X (formerly Twitter) that his team had been working closely with lawmakers to push forward a “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve” policy.

Even though this particular bill was struck down, Montana's involvement in the broader Bitcoin conversation signals a shift in how states are approaching digital assets. If market conditions stabilize and Bitcoin gains further institutional acceptance, the state could revisit the idea in the future.

For now, however, the message from Montana's lawmakers is clear: they’re not ready to bet taxpayer money on Bitcoin just yet.