Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson says closed-door policy-making around the state’s recent stablecoin initiative raises doubts about the state’s commitment to becoming a crypto hub.
Updated Feb 3, 2025, 5: 21 p.m. UTCPublished Feb 3, 2025, 5: 14 p.m. UTC
Over the past few years, Wyoming, a landlocked state in the U.S. Mountain West, has embarked on a journey to become a blockchain pioneer.
With a bold vision of creating an attractive cryptocurrency and blockchain ecosystem, the state’s crypto-friendly laws have positioned Wyoming as the most welcoming state in the U.S. for blockchain companies and innovators. With the pro-crypto stance of the Trump administration, the state has solidified its status as a model for how jurisdictions can build their economies.
Wyoming’s aim to be a beacon of crypto innovation is one reason I chose to make it my home. My family lives in Gillette, and Wyoming has become the center of my work life. I love this place, from my thriving bison ranch in Wheatland to our family’s state-of-the-art healthcare clinic in Gillette, alongside hundreds of employees.
While my commitment to Wyoming runs deep, I am now concerned about the direction the state is taking. Recent events surrounding the state-backed stablecoin initiative have raised serious questions about transparency and accountability in public procurement processes. If Wyoming wants to lead in blockchain – or any emerging technology – fairness and openness must be at the core of its selection processes. With so much at stake, I am addressing this issue head-on by building a framework that sets a standard for local leadership and serves as a model for pro-crypto policies at the national level.
The Promise of Wyoming’s Stablecoin Initiative
The state-backed stablecoin initiative, announced two years ago, was intended to showcase how blockchain could revolutionize the state’s finances and setting an example for other states and nations to follow. My company, Input Output, the driving force behind blockchain Cardano, was proud to support this effort and actively fostered an open and democratic approach with the Wyoming Stablecoin Commission (WSC) and its Blockchain Selection Working Group (WG), which oversaw the entire RFP process for vendors.
Over 18 months, we worked with both parties, contributing to discussions on compliance, issuance, redemption processes, and technological standards. The goal was clear: to ensure Wyoming’s stablecoin initiative would succeed – not just for the state but as a model for the rest of the world.
Biased Procurement Process
Unfortunately, the stablecoin procurement process did not reflect Wyoming’s principles of openness and innovation. Several aspects, including a lack of transparency, technical requirements that did not align with established frameworks, and blatant bias, undermined the entire procurement effort, resulting in the unfair disqualification of Cardano, XRP, Bitcoin, Hashgraph, Algorand, and ICP.
From the onset, the decision-making process was conducted behind closed doors, with no opportunity for public input. Without outside influence, WSC and the WG essentially developed criteria that favored existing solutions, such as Ethereum or Solana, without considering the merits of newer players on the market.
Considering the above, it was no surprise that the Wyoming Stablecoin Commission always had Ethereum as their number-one choice, rendering the entire procurement process inconsequential. Videos (which you can watch here and here) show Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon and Anthony Apollo, Executive Director at WSC, heavily implying that Ethereum would get priority over other blockchain platforms in the bid.
In a Stable Token Commission meeting, Apollo explicitly stated that his personal preference is Ethereum and Polygon. Meanwhile, State Treasurer Curt Meier has also publicly supported Ethereum. It is worth noting that Apollo is strongly tied to Ethereum as he was the Co-Founder of ConsenSys, the software development firm supporting the growth of the Ethereum ecosystem — a fact that only underscores the inherent bias among the key stakeholders.
Moreover, the technical criteria requirements in the evaluation methodology had no established basis in existing regulatory frameworks and so further hampered Cardano and other blockchain vendors’ efforts to compete for the contract