I don't get it. Isn't the dollar already "digital" in the sense that it isn't backed by any physical good but its value is set as a product of a considerable amount of transactions, most of which are already purely digital? Like, every time banks exchange dollars for a financial transaction, or a stockbroker buys or sells some financial asset using dollars, there aren't literal, physical bags of dollar bills being moved around to make that transaction possible. How would a "digital dollar" be any different from that? 
Progress! Forward! To the Future!
It's difficult for people our age to understand, I think, just how very much older policymakers are still unjaded, or un-unimpressed maybe, by the idea of "e-" and "i-" everything. Britain's culture ministry has "Digital", as an uncountable mass noun, as the
first word in its full name now. Old people tend not to like "tech" very much, but they also tend not to
understand it and thus often see it as this mysterious and powerful force that will fix, change, or solve everything.
Personally, I tend to think our society is too cashless as it is already, but I'm well aware that this is an extreme position in the opposite direction.
