Ugh, looks complicated

This past Tuesday, we sent writer Christina Clark to the Roosevelt Institute’s meeting on Bitcoin. Here’s her account of the discussion and overall club experience:

On Tuesday I attended my first Roosevelt Institute event for their discussion Bitcoin: Internet, Money, and the Law. I was intrigued by both the promise of constructive, nonpartisan discussion and the fact that chapter leaders claim responsibility for “BoScwho.”

After walking into Lerner 569, I grabbed a handout detailing basic information on Bitcoin and the rise of virtual currency, and sat down in a chair next to another Roosevelt Institute first-timer. Small talk allowed me to learn that he was an experienced Bitcoin user, though the things he paid for with it “weren’t appropriate to bring up in mixed company.”

As that statement took my imagination places it never needed to go, the meeting began. Chapter president, Brit Byrd, gave an introduction and then two other club members presented some more information about how Bitcoin works and how governments respond to it. They then opened the discussion to the group by asking for opinions about how the US government should regulate and respond to Bitcoin. Many people believed that since Bitcoin users make the choice to participate, they also make the choice to take on the risk of the currency losing value. However, others cited concerns over the impacts a Bitcoin crash could have on non-users, as well as the potential for Bitcoin to be useful for activities like terrorism. The lack of transparency, both in who controls Bitcoin and who uses it, was also mentioned repeatedly.

The second question we discussed focused on the plausibility of having all future currency be digital. The first response was from a member who was interested in virtual currency’s potential to transcend state sovereignty. He concluded his point by calling Bitcoin a “capital-L liberal’s wet dream.” The room took some time to recover from that statement, and then people brought up concerns over privacy issues stemming from a virtual log of all transactions (which is a feature of Bitcoin) and the long term viability of the Bitcoin system. The last word for that segment of the discussion did present a more positive perspective on virtual currency, as the speaker stated that he felt a free market based, unregulated currency is still better than currency from a chaotic or corrupt central bank.

The last official section of the discussion called for final thoughts, and nearly every person in the circle presented a “sound bite” of their opinion of what should be done about Bitcoin. One person brought up the environmental consequences of using large amounts of energy to run Bitcoin software, others compared illegal activities paid for by Bitcoin to illegal activities paid for by US currency, and the final person gave his opinion that regulating Bitcoin makes it no different than any national currency.

During the closing, Britt Byrd reminded everyone of the chance to be part of the Roosevelt Institutes’ policy writing teams, ranging from education to defense and diplomacy. Once a year the club publishes a journal detailing policy solutions formulated by the members. He also reminded everyone of upcoming events including 21st Amendments (“cheaper than BoSchwo, less offensive than The Heights, and before 1020″) on Thursday and their first Morningside Chat podcast featuring the former Prime Minister of Iraqi-Kurdistan. He especially promoted Thursday’s Voting Week talk on Democratic Engagement with Joelle Gamble, National Director of the Roosevelt Institute Campus Network. The event is open to the public and takes place in Lerner Hall, Satow Room from 4 to 5 pm.

Image via Shutterstock