NH Bitcoiners Speak to Senate Committee About Bitcoin Protection Bill – VIDEO

Bitcoin NH License Plate

Bitcoiners Love NH

The New Hampshire house of representatives recently passed a historic Bitcoin protection bill, that if it makes it through the senate and governor will make New Hampshire the opposite of New York. New York is infamous for its “bitlicense” regulations that drove multiple bitcoin businesses out of the Empire State. In contrast, New Hampshire, if this bill passes, would become a state with explicit protection against regulating Bitcoin businesses as “money transmitters”.

Last week, HB 436 had its public hearing before the senate commerce committee and a bunch of bitcoiners from across the state came out to sign and testify in favor of the bill, which would help ensure Bitcoin businesses continue to launch in and relocate to New Hampshire. It would further solidify New Hampshire’s place in the world as a cryptocurrency hotspot.

The speakers in favor far outnumbered those speaking against, which was really only the NH banking commission, who obviously does not want to lose hold of any of their precious power.

Those who spoke were on point and did a great job communicating with the senators on the committee. Turns out that two of those senators, Andy Sanborn and chairman Daniel Innis both already own bitcoin!

Will the bill pass the senate and be signed by the governor, or will the banking bureaucrats pull out all the stops to crush it? Stay tuned here to Free Keene for the latest on the NH Bitcoin scene.

Here’s the full hearing video:

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. Interesting. If this bill doesn’t pass, how are you going to live? I’d love to see how far you would drop to your knees to get a license.

  2. Jacks, why do I need to ask the government for permission to make a living?

  3. Now Jacks, you’re giving many of us the impression that you’d prefer a society where everyone must eke out their own existences at the pleasure and behest of bureaucrats. I wonder why you’re unable to anticipate the negative economic consequences that are sure to occur as a direct result of such policies? David and I can.

  4. @David Jurist

    Because unlike us, David, Jacks is unable to comprehend the value of having legitimate competition in the currency markets. That’s why he can’t articulate a single substantive argument against bitcoin outside of repetitively labeling them as “volatile” or “easily manipulated.” He’s funny that way.

  5. Like two peas in a pod. Thank you for the latest information Jacks.

  6. Since you’re going off topic here, Jacks, do you remember the time our dear friend Maggie Hassan was caught accepting generous campaign contributions from her wealthy union associates? My word, that was quite the scandal, now wasn’t it? And yet she’s never once had to rue the day that she broke the law, now has she?


    Oh, and Jacks? Did you know that our dear friend also just happens to be a repeat offender for this very sort of thing? It makes one wonder just how many other times she’s willfully broken the law and avoided being caught, now doesn’t it?


    But that’s neither here nor there because, after all, she keeps her campaign promises, right my pet?

Care to comment?