Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Project 2025: Trump strikes at the Federal Reserve and financial protection

Project 2025: Trump strikes at the Federal Reserve and financial protection
1 U.S.A dollar banknotes

Last spring and summer, The Fulcrum published a 30-part series on Project 2025. Now that Donald Trump’s second term The Fulcrum has started Part 2 of the series has commenced.

Project 2025, the 800-page right-wing policy blueprint for the Trump administration, proposed a menu of controversial policies designed to bring numerous independent federal agencies under the thumb of President Donald Trump. In mid-February, the White House issued a series of controversial – and possibly illegal – executive orders designed to implement the Project 2025 agenda. One targeted agency with the potential for extensive economic damage is the Federal Reserve Board and its affiliated branches.


The Federal Reserve – also known as the Fed – is not your average federal agency. Established in 1913, it oversees the central banking system for the entire country. It superintends many of the most crucial levers for making the economy run, including maintaining the financial system's stability, supervising banks, adjusting interest rates, maximizing employment, and more. Due to its crucial role, Congress established it to act independently and above the political fray. Nevertheless, it has often been caught in the crossfire of Republican and Democratic battles over economic policy.

The architects of Project 2025 see the Fed as a meddling bureaucracy that causes more problems than it fixes. So their proposed fix is simple: return the U.S. economy to some version of the unmanaged financial rawness of the pre-1913 era and its system of so-called “free banking.” Under that banking regimen, “neither interest rates nor the supply of money is controlled by the government,” according to Project 2025, and this would “effectively abolish” the Federal Reserve.

However, as the Panic of 1907 showed, the centralized bank system of the Federal Reserve was created in response to the failures of the free banking system. That system was sometimes referred to as “wildcat banking” because it frequently led to runs on banks and many bank failures.

Nevertheless, the Trump administration has made its first chess move with an executive order designed to strip the Federal Reserve of its ability to oversee and regulate Wall Street. The intent is to handcuff the Fed and other financial agencies so that they must submit major policy shifts and legal interpretations to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget for review. Who runs OMB? None other than Russell Vought, one of the original architects of Project 2025.

Trump’s order is still relatively new, so it’s too soon to determine the ultimate impact and whether a federal court will intervene. While the presidential order is not as damaging as abolishing the Fed altogether, the Trump administration’s intent to rein in the Fed’s independence is clear. To send an even stronger signal, the Trump administration went a step further with one of the Fed’s allied organizations, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

The CFPB is charged with shielding Americans from consumer, financial, and investment fraud. Project 2025 called the CFPB “unconstitutional” and for it to be “abolished.” On January 31, President Trump appointed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent as acting director of the CFPB, and shortly after assuming the post, Bessent ordered the CFPB staff to cease all rulemaking and pause litigation efforts. On February 7, Bessent appointed Project 2025’s Russel Vought as the agency’s acting director, and Voght’s first act was to order the CFPB offices to close and notify staff that they cannot “perform any work tasks.”

The dangerous creep of Trump’s cryptocurrency

So, the CFPB has been effectively shut down. The CFPB is one of the main regulatory bodies overseeing the new “financial gold rush” of cryptocurrency; thus, the risks are substantial. The short history of cryptocurrencies has been speculation, scams, and money laundering, with no actual legitimate use as a currency of exchange. Most recently, crypto was the currency medium involved in the largest hacking theft in modern history, when $1.4 billion in crypto was stolen from the Bybit exchange. The FBI has accused the North Korean government of being behind the hack.

The intricacies of financial markets in recent years have made it much more difficult for the average consumer or investor to assess investment and banking risks. With the rise of crypto, effective financial oversight is more crucial than ever. Yet, the Trump deregulators and Elon Musk’s DOGE are stripping away the agencies that perform that vital service.

Why would they do that? Maybe they have an ulterior motive.

Is it just a coincidence that President Trump has announced a plan for a national “strategic crypto reserve”? It sounds like an important national security undertaking, like the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, but this is a horse of a different color.

This past January, at the height of Trump’s swearing-in euphoria, the president and his financial advisors launched his crypto coin, which, with great fanfare, was called the $Trump coin. It attracted billions of dollars from Trump supporters and soared in value. The bulk of $Trump coins were initially bought by a handful of “whales,” large investors with connections to the Trump circle. Once the price inflated, the insiders sold their holdings for huge profits, causing the price to collapse. The $Trump coin lost more than 80 percent of its value, and in less than a month, 800,000 small investors were left owning nearly worthless crypto, losing a cumulative $2 billion.

The same thing happened in Argentina, where the populist President Javier Milei hyped a new cryptocurrency called $Libra. The price collapsed when the insider investors sold their holdings, and the small investors were bilked out of $250 million.

These crypto exchanges are like unregulated casinos in which the politically connected insiders fleece the small investor-gamblers. If Trump manages to establish a federal “strategic crypto reserve,” potentially paid for by US tax dollars, the scams associated with $Libra and $Trump could be the red flag warnings for something much more catastrophic.

Whatever Trump and Elon Musk are planning, following the playbook of Project 2025 means the Fed, the CFBP, or other independent federal agencies will have reduced ability to probe into their financial policies. It is alarming that they seem to be cutting these independent watchdogs out of the loop while hyping what may end up as a national crypto Ponzi scheme.

Indeed, Scott Alvarez, a former general counsel at the Fed, ominously says, “The president has announced he wants to dismantle a system of independent agencies that Congress has established and the courts have upheld and want to shift funding decisions from Congress and the appropriations process to himself.”

This, in essence, is the playbook of Project 2025: concentrating immense power inside the office of the presidency. One of the things learned from the 2008 meltdown is that a financial system that is ever-mutating in hidden ways creates hazards for the entire economy. Without adequate oversight, excessive risk-taking and manipulation will surely follow. In 2008, nobody realized this until it was too late, and the economy collapsed. Alarmingly, the Trump administration may well be seeding the conditions for the next financial crisis.

Steven Hill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America. You can reach him on X @StevenHill1776.

Read More

Blank Checks and Empty Promises: The Collapse of Congressional Fiscal Power

A politician counting money in front of the US Capitol Building.

Getty Images, fStop Images - Antenna

Blank Checks and Empty Promises: The Collapse of Congressional Fiscal Power

From Governing to Grandstanding

There was a time—believe it or not—when Congress actually passed budgets the old-fashioned way: through debate, compromise, and the occasional all-night session, not theatrics designed to appeal to cable news and social media. The process, while messy, followed a structure: hearings, markups, votes, and compromises. That structure—known as regular order—wasn’t just congressional tradition. It was the scaffolding of democratic accountability. It has also been steadily torn down.

Deadlines and dysfunction better define today’s Congress. Instead of the back-and-forth of healthy deliberation, Congress relies on continuing resolutions and last-minute omnibus bills. Budget gimmicks that were once used only during fiscal emergencies—backloaded cuts, timing shifts, reconciliation sleight-of-hand—are now the rule, not the exception. Congress has shifted from prioritizing policy to prioritizing the message and crafting political narratives.

Keep ReadingShow less
Outside Money, Inside Influence: How National Donors Shaped the 2024 Congressional Elections

An individual voting with money.

Getty Images, Orbon Alija

Outside Money, Inside Influence: How National Donors Shaped the 2024 Congressional Elections

In 2024, campaign fundraising in federal elections was more nationalized than ever. Candidates for both the House and Senate continued a decades-long trend of relying less on donations from the voters they represent and more on contributions from donors across the country. The nationalization of campaign contributions, once a concern among elections experts, is now a defining feature of congressional campaigns.

An analysis of 2024 House and Senate campaign data reveals just how deeply this transformation has taken hold. From candidates in small states with limited donor bases to top congressional leaders with national profiles — and especially in competitive races in battleground states — non-local campaign contributions were ubiquitous.

Keep ReadingShow less
Who Really Pays for Congress? Local Donors All but Disappear in 2024

Hundred dollar bills.

Giorgio Trovato on Unsplash

Who Really Pays for Congress? Local Donors All but Disappear in 2024

WASHINGTON, D.C. - There is an old saying: All politics is local. However, many voters may get the impression this is becoming less and less a reality -- particularly in US House and Senate elections where candidates are elected to represent specific districts or states, but campaign to a national audience.

This is because local influence in the most contested races is dying out -- a statement not contrived from opinion, but fact.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money in politics
Super PACs tied to major parties misled voters, complaint alleges
erhui1979/Getty Images

Is It Possible To Reverse Course on the Corruptive Influence of Money in American Politics?

A $288 Billion Dollar Proto-Presidency?

The 2024 presidential election saw Elon Musk spend over a quarter of a billion to elect President Trump, which is exactly $288 million according to The  Washington Post report of the final tally of campaign spending on January 31, 2025. Did that staggering campaign contribution buy the billionaire the right to attend cabinet meetings and stand beside the President in the Oval Office and at other events? Did those millions buy a Proto-Presidency, complete with the opportunity to run a department aggressively dismantling government and radically changing what government does for ordinary Americans while personally benefiting from government contracts? Professor Lawrence Lessig argues that ‘Musk is the clearest example of the corrupting influence of money in politics.’ According to a recent PEW study, 72% of Americans agree that money is the number one corrupting influence in politics. So, what can be done? Are we too far down this road to make meaningful change, or are there options?

Keep ReadingShow less