Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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

What Really Guides Lawmakers’ Decisions on Capitol Hill
us a flag on white concrete building

What Really Guides Lawmakers’ Decisions on Capitol Hill

The following article is excerpted from "Citizen’s Handbook for Influencing Elected Officials."

Despite the efforts of high school social studies teachers, parents, journalists, and political scientists, the workings of our government remain a mystery to most Americans. Caricatures, misconceptions, and stereotypes dominate citizens’ views of Congress, contributing to our reluctance to engage in our democracy. In reality, the system works pretty much as we were taught in third grade. Congress is far more like Schoolhouse Rock than House of Cards. When all the details are burned away, legislators generally follow three voices when making a decision. One member of Congress called these voices the “Three H’s”: Heart, Head, and Health—meaning political health.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illustration of someone holding a strainer, and the words "fakes," "facts," "news," etc. going through it.

Trump-era misinformation has pushed American politics to a breaking point. A Truth in Politics law may be needed to save democracy.

Getty Images, SvetaZi

The Need for a Truth in Politics Law: De-Frauding American Politics

“Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?” With those words in 1954, Army lawyer Joseph Welch took Senator Joe McCarthy to task and helped end McCarthy’s destructive un-American witch hunt. The time has come to say the same to Donald Trump and his MAGA allies and stop their vile perversion of our right to free speech.

American politics has always been rife with misleading statements and, at times, outright falsehoods. Mendacity just seems to be an ever-present aspect of politics. But with the ascendency of Trump, and especially this past year, things have taken an especially nasty turn, becoming so aggressive and incendiary as to pose a real threat to the health and well-being of our nation’s democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

A memorial for Ashli Babbitt sits near the US Capitol during a Day of Remembrance and Action on the one year anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

(John Lamparski/NurPhoto/AP)

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

In the wake of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump quickly took up the cause of a 35-year-old veteran named Ashli Babbitt.

“Who killed Ashli Babbitt?” he asked in a one-sentence statement on July 1, 2021.

Keep ReadingShow less
Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

Supreme Court, Allen v. Milligan Illegal Congressional Voting Map

Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

A wave of redistricting battles in early 2026 is reshaping the political map ahead of the midterm elections and intensifying long‑running fights over gerrymandering and democratic representation.

In California, a three‑judge federal panel on January 15 upheld the state’s new congressional districts created under Proposition 50, ruling 2–1 that the map—expected to strengthen Democratic advantages in several competitive seats—could be used in the 2026 elections. The following day, a separate federal court dismissed a Republican lawsuit arguing that the maps were unconstitutional, clearing the way for the state’s redistricting overhaul to stand. In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers have advanced a constitutional amendment that would allow mid‑decade redistricting, a move they describe as a response to aggressive Republican map‑drawing in other states; some legislators have openly discussed the possibility of a congressional map that could yield 10 Democratic‑leaning seats out of 11. In Missouri, the secretary of state has acknowledged in court that ballot language for a referendum on the state’s congressional map could mislead voters, a key development in ongoing litigation over the fairness of the state’s redistricting process. And in Utah, a state judge has ordered a new congressional map that includes one Democratic‑leaning district after years of litigation over the legislature’s earlier plan, prompting strong objections from Republican lawmakers who argue the court exceeded its authority.

Keep ReadingShow less