Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Why Fed Independence Is a Cornerstone of Democracy—and Why It’s Under Threat

Opinion

Why Fed Independence Is a Cornerstone of Democracy—and Why It’s Under Threat
1 U.S.A dollar banknotes

In an era of rising polarization and performative politics, few institutions remain as consequential and as poorly understood by citizens as the Federal Reserve.

While headlines swirl around inflation, interest rates, and stock market reactions, the deeper story is often missed: the Fed’s independence is not just a technical matter of monetary policy. It’s a democratic safeguard.


That’s the premise behind the Sept. 25 episode of The Unity Forum, a cross-partisan webinar series hosted by Chris Malone to elevate civil dialogue and challenge assumptions on the most pressing issues of our time.

Chris is co-author of the award-winning book, The Human Brand, and a founder of Alumni For Freedom & Democracy, a network of individuals committed to preserving the essential freedoms that sustain an open society—freedom of thought, civil dialogue, democratic principles, and economic opportunity.

The guest speaker for the webinar is Dr. Pat Harker, whose career spans the highest levels of academia, government, and finance, including a decade as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia and current leadership roles at the Wharton School and Penn Washington.

Dr. Harker recently authored a provocative op-ed in The Wall Street Journal titled “Public Ignorance and Fed Independence,” arguing that cynicism about the Fed stems not from its actions but from widespread misunderstanding of its legal boundaries and economic role. He warns that political interference—whether through executive threats or legislative overreach—risks destabilizing the very mechanisms that protect long-term economic health.

The conversation will explore:

  • Whether recent Federal Open Market Committee decisions reflect data-driven independence or creeping political pressure.
  • What the Fed does and what it is legally prohibited from doing.
  • How the judiciary, Congress, and public opinion serve as backstops against interference.
  • The implications of budget deficits, Social Security reform, and demographic shifts on monetary policy.
  • What universities must do to prepare the next generation of economists for the complex realities of central banking.

Dr. Harker’s insights are especially timely given recent attempts to dismiss Fed leadership, a move that echoes historical tensions but may signal a new level of partisan intrusion. As he puts it, “The Fed’s independence is not a luxury—it’s a necessity.”

For those interested in diving deeper into this critical issue, join the live webinar or receive a recording of The Unity Forum, featuring Dr. Harker.

The event will be held on Zoom on Thursday, Sept. 25, at 1:00 p.m. ET, with an audience Q&A near the end of the program. All registered participants will receive a link to the discussion recording, allowing them to listen at their convenience.

Webinar Registration: https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_995jr6iBSYmwEIpb_Zhmxg

In an era when economic policy is often reduced to market performance and partisan soundbites, we need more spaces for reasoned discourse. That’s what The Unity Forum aims to provide.

David Nevins is publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

From Nixon to Trump: A Blueprint for Restoring Congressional Authority
the capitol building in washington d c is seen from across the water

From Nixon to Trump: A Blueprint for Restoring Congressional Authority

The unprecedented power grab by President Trump, in many cases, usurping the clear and Constitutional authority of the U.S. Congress, appears to leave our legislative branch helpless against executive branch encroachment. In fact, the opposite is true. Congress has ample authority to reassert its role in our democracy, and there is a precedent.

During the particularly notable episode of executive branch corruption during the Nixon years, Congress responded with a robust series of reforms. Campaign finance laws were dramatically overhauled and strengthened. Nixon’s overreach on congressionally authorized spending was corrected with the passage of the Impoundment Act. And egregious excesses by the military and intelligence community were blunted by the War Powers Act and the bipartisan investigation by Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho).

Keep ReadingShow less
In and Out: The Limits of Term Limits

Person speaking in front of an American flag

Jason_V/Getty Images

In and Out: The Limits of Term Limits

Nearly 14 years ago, after nearly 12 years of public service, my boss, Rep. Todd Platts, surprised many by announcing he was not running for reelection. He never term-limited himself, per se. Yet he had long supported legislation for 12-year term limits. Stepping aside at that point made sense—a Cincinnatus move, with Todd going back to the Pennsylvania Bar as a hometown judge.

Term limits are always a timely issue. Term limits may have died down as an issue in the halls of Congress, but I still hear it from people in my home area.

Keep ReadingShow less
“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”:
A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

Liliana Mason

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”: A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

In the aftermath of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the threat of political violence has become a topic of urgent concern in the United States. While public support for political violence remains low—according to Sean Westwood of the Polarization Research Lab, fewer than 2 percent of Americans believe that political murder is acceptable—even isolated incidence of political violence can have a corrosive effect.

According to political scientist Lilliana Mason, political violence amounts to a rejection of democracy. “If a person has used violence to achieve a political goal, then they’ve given up on the democratic process,” says Mason, “Instead, they’re trying to use force to affect government.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Combatting the Trump Administration’s Militarized Logic

Members of the National Guard patrol near the U.S. Capitol on October 1, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Al Drago/Getty Images)

Combatting the Trump Administration’s Militarized Logic

Approaching a year of the new Trump administration, Americans are getting used to domestic militarized logic. A popular sense of powerlessness permeates our communities. We bear witness to the attacks against innocent civilians by ICE, the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and we naturally wonder—is this the new American discourse? Violent action? The election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York offers hope that there may be another way.

Zohran Mamdani, a Muslim democratic socialist, was elected as mayor of New York City on the fourth of November. Mamdani’s platform includes a reimagining of the police force in New York City. Mamdani proposes a Department of Community Safety. In a CBS interview, Mamdani said, “Our vision for a Department of Community Safety, the DCS, is that we would have teams of dedicated mental health outreach workers that we deploy…to respond to those incidents and get those New Yorkers out of the subway system and to the services that they actually need.” Doing so frees up NYPD officers to respond to actual threats and crime, without a responsibility to the mental health of civilians.

Keep ReadingShow less