House GOP Pushes CBDC Ban in Defense Bill Amid Conservative Backlash

The controversy stems from an amendment filed Tuesday by Rep. Keith Self (R-TX) titled “Anti-CBDC Surveillance State.” The measure would explicitly prohibit the Federal Reserve from “testing, developing, or implementing” a CBDC or any substantially similar digital asset. It also bars Federal Reserve banks from offering products directly to individuals or holding accounts for them, a provision aimed at preventing the central bank from becoming a retail competitor to commercial banks.

The amendment was a direct response to what conservative lawmakers call a broken commitment. House GOP leaders, including Speaker Mike Johnson, had reportedly promised to include anti-CBDC language authored by Majority Whip Tom Emmer in the NDAA. However, when the 3,086-page defense bill was unveiled Sunday, that language was absent. “Promises were broken to include this language in the NDAA,” Self tweeted. “My amendment would fix the bill.” He later told Fox Business that after reviewing the bill for hours, he confirmed the promised provision was not included.

According to a House leadership aide speaking to The Hill, efforts to secure the CBDC ban “fell apart amid negotiations over the bipartisan housing package,” and securing a deal on the digital currency restriction “was not something that was ultimately going to be acceptable to our members.” This explanation did little to quell the backlash from hard-line Republicans who view the omission as a critical failure on a key policy priority.

For supporters of the ban, the issue transcends financial technology and strikes at fundamental questions of liberty. The amendment’s very title frames the debate: CBDCs are seen not as mere digital dollars but as potential tools for a “surveillance state.” Republicans argue that a government-issued digital currency could allow unprecedented monitoring and control over citizens’ financial lives.

“CBDC inserts the government between you and your money then sets conditions on your access to it,” Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH) stated on Tuesday. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) echoed this, noting her support for cryptocurrency but opposition to “any system that lets the government cut off Americans’ ability to control, buy, or sell with their own money.” The amendment attempts to address these fears by carving out an exception for “dollar-denominated currency that is open, permissionless, and private,” aiming to preserve the anonymity protections associated with physical cash for any future digital alternatives.

This legislative push comes despite existing executive action. In January, President Trump signed an executive order prohibiting federal agencies from establishing or promoting CBDCs, citing risks to financial stability, privacy, and national sovereignty. However, lawmakers like Davidson argue an executive order is insufficient: “The President’s EO banning CBDC is great, but we need and were promised a law.” They seek a permanent, statutory prohibition that a future administration cannot easily reverse.

The fate of Self’s amendment now rests with the House Rules Committee, which will decide whether it advances to a floor vote. The political calculus is complicated by the NDAA’s status as one of the few “must-pass” bills in Congress. “We have to pass an NDAA,” Self acknowledged, underscoring the pressure to fund the Department of Defense while simultaneously fighting for policy riders.

The internal GOP conflict reveals a significant divide on how to handle emerging digital finance. On one side, a faction of conservatives is drawing a hard line against any form of central bank digital currency, framing it as an existential threat to financial privacy. On the other, House leadership, navigating broader legislative negotiations, appears to have deemed the issue a lower priority, at least for this round of talks on the defense bill.

As the House GOP plans to pass the defense bill, the controversy over the CBDC ban amendment highlights a growing political battle where financial technology, individual privacy, and the role of government intersect. The outcome will signal not only the immediate future of a U.S. CBDC but also the strength of the privacy-focused coalition within the Republican party as it confronts the digital transformation of money.