Wall Street insider rips 4 proposals aimed at Trump’s 'populist base'

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) join President Donald Trump to speak to reporters aboard Air Force One en route from Florida to Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, U.S., January 4, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Although President Donald Trump is employing some major Wall Street veterans in his administration — including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick (formerly of Cantor Fitzgerald) and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent — he is also drawing his share of criticism in the financial world. Some of it is coming from David Bahnsen, a conservative known for his wealth management background.

In a biting article published by the National Review on January 12, Bahnsen attacks four recent Trump proposals he considers unworkable.

The proposals, according to Bahnsen, are (1) "an outright ban on institutional buying, if those investors own more than 100 properties, of single-family residential real estate," (2) "Government control of executive compensation at defense and aerospace companies, along with, under loosely defined circumstances, a ban on such companies' returning capital, whether by share buybacks or dividends, to investors," (3) "The implementation of quantitative easing by ordering the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion of mortgage-backed securities," and (4) "A federally imposed limit of 10 percent on the interest rates credit cards can charge borrowers."

"Of that list," Bahnsen argues, "only No. 3 is arguably allowed within the powers of the presidency, and even that only because the federal government has foolishly maintained the conservatorship of Fannie and Freddie 17 years past their demise…. But even if all of these ideas go the way of his 50-year-mortgage idea of not that long ago — it has already been abandoned — even mere ideation on social media carries consequences."

Bahnsen continues, "Not only do these proposals stroke the emotions of his populist base that demands that the government 'do something,' but they offer credibility and support to future endeavors to do the same thing that may prove more serious and substantive…. With each of his proclamations, I believe the president finds political value in a midterm election year and, to some degree, believes that they would benefit, at least superficially or marginally, the people for whom they are intended. The opposite is true."

Bahnsen argues that #4, if implemented, would make it difficult for low-income Americans to obtain credit.

"Those with lower incomes or troubled credit histories will not enjoy 10 percent credit card interest, but rather, no credit card interest, because millions of borrowers will lose access to credit," the wealth management veteran writes. "Their need for borrowing will not subside, though, so they will pivot to payday lenders, pawn shops, loan sharks, or otherwise less reputable outlets at a cost far greater than they incur now."

David Bahnsen's full article for The National Review is available at this link (subscription required).

From Your Site Articles