Senate Bill No. 1330—also known as the “Blockchain the Budget” bill—continues to spark debate, fintech executive and civic technologist Ann Cuisia offers a pointed yet nuanced counterposition. While not opposed to blockchain, Cuisia raises flags about mandating any specific technology through legislation.

“I am not against using blockchain,” she clarifies in our exclusive interview. “In fact, I’ve been building blockchain systems for business and finance since 2017.”

Her concern lies elsewhere: when laws freeze innovation by dictating the tool rather than the outcome. “Legislation should define outcomes—transparency, verifiability, accountability, and allow any compliant technology, including blockchain, to meet those outcomes,” she explains.

What’s at Stake in SB 1330

Cuisia argues that while blockchain can be a powerful tool, legislating its use prematurely risks vendor lock-in, wasted public funds, and missed opportunities for better frameworks.

“When the law prescribes the tool, it freezes innovation and risks political or vendor capture,” she says. “But when it enshrines the principle such as open access to auditable budget data, blockchain naturally rises as one of the strongest contenders, not by decree but by merit.”

She also points out that current pilot implementations, such as those involving tokenized budget documents, aren’t yet aligned with the bill’s ambition of “following the money.”

“If you mean converting budget documents to NFTs like the ones in DBM, many can do it—we can do it now,” she says. “But ‘following the money’ like the good Senator has been saying would require more than uploading gazillions of documents to Polygon. It is simply a wrong strategy—unnecessary and expensive.”

What a Better Law Could Look Like

Cuisia proposes a different path: one that’s technologically neutral, measurable, and future-proof.

She outlines this vision in a parallel proposal: the National Budget in Action Act. The aim, she says, is to “define the standards of openness and not the tools.” But what would that look like in practice?

“Publishing all budget lifecycle data in open, machine-readable formats; providing public APIs and audit logs that anyone can verify; allowing mirror platforms run by civil society and academia to ensure redundancy and integrity; mandating open-source systems and interoperability, so innovation can happen on top of shared data.”

This framework, she adds, “sets the rules of fairness. Blockchain, AI, or any next-generation ledger can compete, not by lobbying, but by delivering measurable impact.”

Evaluating Blockchain on Utility, Not Buzzwords

One of Cuisia’s most memorable assertions is that blockchain should win on merit, not branding. “If blockchain passes these tests better than centralized systems, use it,” she says. “If not, the next evolution—like perhaps distributed transparency logs or verifiable databases—should win.”

She proposes a “utility matrix” to evaluate blockchain and other emerging tools: “The key criteria are verifiability, interoperability, auditability, resilience, accessibility, and cost efficiency. You have other technologies that are NOT blockchain but can deliver immutability of records.”

This isn’t a rejection of blockchain—it’s a demand for due diligence and results.

On Revising SB 1330

When asked what she would do if given the chance to rewrite SB 1330, Cuisia is clear and constructive.

“I would rewrite it around goals, governance, and guarantees, not a single tool.” She even offers an alternative title: “Public Financial Transparency and Verifiability Act” or the “National Budget in Action Act.”

Her revisions include:

• Replacing “blockchain” with “verifiable public record systems”
  
  
• Mandating open data formats and APIs
  
  
• Creating a multi-stakeholder National Budget Watch Council
  
  
• Institutionalizing civic audit platforms and mirror sites
  
  
• Incentivizing investigative journalism and citizen oversight

Principles Over Platforms

For Cuisia, the debate isn’t about blockchain’s legitimacy, it’s about how governance frameworks can ensure transparency beyond hype cycles.

“Blockchain remains a promising tool,” she concludes. “But governance must never be reduced to a tech choice.”

She reiterated, “We don’t need to ‘blockchain the budget.’ We need to make the budget verifiable, auditable, and citizen-accessible, whatever technology achieves that best.”

‍