Hawaii removed restrictions, namely the requirement for companies dealing with digital assets to hold a money transmitter license. This indicates a positive stance toward Bitcoin. Between this and the state-level FOMO, I would say Hawaii seems likely to initiate a reserve strategy.

Alaska, on the other hand, has a more stringent regulatory framework surrounding digital assets and still leans toward the cautious investor protection angle. I like to think that holding back on a Bitcoin reserve strategy is akin to delaying the adoption of gunpowder after its discovery — it's only a matter of how early or late you inevitably fold.