January, 31 2021, 11:00pm EDT

Robinhood Highlights Dangers of Biden Administration Appointing Fintech-Tied Regulators
Fintech Darlings, including Michael Barr, are Rumored Favorites for Key Regulatory Positions
WASHINGTON
Last week, both progressive Democrats and conservative Republicans were united in calling for hearings on the stock-trading app Robinhood after it froze trading of several stocks, including GameStop, at the expense of retail investors and to protect the financial interests of established hedge funds.
Congress' first test of whether it is serious about the issues raised by the Gamestop-Robinhood matter is right around the corner: who will the Biden administration nominate to serve as the next Comptroller of the Currency, and what questions will the Senate ask of that nominee?
Right now, it appears the new administration favors several fintech-linked individuals for crucial financial regulatory positions, which could translate to lenient oversight over the industry for years to come. Significantly, fintech industry consultant and University of Michigan administrator Michael Barr is the reported frontrunner to serve as the next Comptroller of the Currency, a crucial national bank regulator.
Barr advises a fintech-focused venture capital fund, previously advised controversial fintech firms Ripple and LendingClub, and advises the fintech-funded think tank Alliance for Innovative Regulation.
The Comptroller of the Currency is not an obscure role. In fact, this office will serve as one of the primary regulators determining the rules of the road for fintech companies like Robinhood, including questions of data privacy, consumer harm, oversight, money laundering, and their ability to partner with megabanks and other Wall Street players.
The Robinhood-GameStop controversy highlights how fintech will pose serious and unique regulatory challenges to the Biden administration in the coming four years. Members of Congress who are raising the alarm about Robinhood and fintech generally would be wise to ask any potential nominees tied to the fintech industry, like Michael Barr, the following questions during their confirmation hearings:
- Do you now or have you ever had an equity stake in any fintech or cryptocurrency firm, most especially those which you have advised or been employed by? If so, name the firms.
- Do you believe it is likely that any fintech start-ups that compensated you marketed their association with you to prospective investors?
- Have you ever provided policy, regulatory, or strategic advice to a fintech or cryptocurrency firm? If so, how much and how were you compensated, which clients have you advised, and what was the content of your assistance?
- Do you now or have you ever invested personally in a fintech or cryptocurrency firm, or professionally advised investors in a fintech or cryptocurrency firm? If so, for how long did you have this financial or advisory relationship, and are the activities of the firms in which you or your associates invested relevant to the position for which you are now nominated?
- Do you now or have you ever owned cryptocurrency? Have you ever been compensated or gifted cryptocurrency, most especially cryptocurrency produced by a firm you advised or were employed by?
- Have you ever advised or been employed by a non-profit organization substantially funded by a fintech or cryptocurrency firm, such as a think tank or advocacy organization? If so, were you compensated, including via cryptocurrency? Has this non-profit organization produced work relevant to the position for which you are now nominated? When did your employment by this organization end, and when did the organization stop marketing their association with you?
- Have you ever conducted fundraising on behalf of an academic employer by requesting funding from a fintech corporation or for-profit fintech funded organization?
- Have you ever conducted research funded by a fintech or cryptocurrency firm, or investors in fintech or cryptocurrency firms? If so, was such research relevant to the position for which you are now nominated? Were you compensated, including via cryptocurrency, by the firm(s) or investor(s)?
- If you have ever served in a professional fundraising role, have you raised funds from a fintech or cryptocurrency firm, or its major executives and/or financial backers?
- If you have answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, in what ways do you expect to govern or regulate on issues relevant to the firms with which you have a past association? Do you predict that these firms will materially benefit from your governance decisions?
- Will you commit now to not pursue nor accept employment, compensation, or other professional benefit from firms within the fintech or cryptocurrency industries after you leave this role? Regardless of your answer to the previous question, what do you predict you shall pursue professionally after your time in government service?
- The OCC just granted its first Special Purpose National Bank Charter to a fintech firm last year, despite Harvard Law School's Forum on Corporate Governance concluding these charters benefit fintech "investors such as private equity firms" who want to bank "without the burdens of regulation." Would you grant additional Special Purpose charters to fintech firms who seek to avoid state banking regulations?
- Do you think an association with a former financial regulator helps a nascent firm convince investors that it is legitimate and law-abiding?
The Revolving Door Project (RDP) scrutinizes executive branch appointees to ensure they use their office to serve the broad public interest, rather than to entrench corporate power or seek personal advancement.
LATEST NEWS
Sanders Introduces Bill to 'Thwart Big Tech Oligarchs' Via 50% Public Stake in AI Giants
The senator said his legislation aims to ensure "that AI benefits humanity, not just the richest people on the planet."
Jun 18, 2026
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday introduced legislation that would give the American public a 50% ownership stake in the largest artificial intelligence companies, a move that comes as AI capitalism is rewarding a handful of plutocrats with unprecedented wealth at the eventual expense of many millions of jobs—and possibly humanity's very existence.
Sanders' American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act would give the public a direct ownership stake in the largest AI companies in America via a one-off 50% tax on the companies' stock. The taxed shares would be deposited into the sovereign wealth fund, a state-owned investment vehicle similar in purpose to Norway's Government Pension Fund, which is funded by oil revenue.
The senator estimates that the tax would generate around $7 trillion for the fund.
“The principle is simple: When a public resource generates wealth, the public should share in that wealth,” Sanders said in a statement. “The future of AI and the fate of humanity must not be decided behind closed doors in Silicon Valley by billionaires seeking to maximize their power and profit. It must be decided by workers, parents, teachers, artists, scientists, communities, and the American people.”
Sanders' proposal comes as AI and related companies have generated trillions of dollars for their shareholders and executives. Meanwhile, AI deployments have resulted in thousands of lost jobs per month in the United States, with that number expected to increase dramatically as the technology improves exponentially.
Eventually, recursive self-improvement—AI that evolves independently of human control—is widely expected to result in Artificial General Intelligence, a tipping point when AI matches or exceeds human capabilities across virtually all cognitive tasks. Experts say that this could lead to wildly varying outcomes, ranging from a "golden age" of AI-driven prosperity to techno-authoritarian government to malicious artificial intelligence wiping out humanity.
In addition to the sovereign wealth fund proposal, Sanders is also calling for a nationwide moratorium on AI data centers, which cause tremendous environmental harm while consuming a staggering amount of energy amidst a worsening climate emergency.
“As a society, we can no longer sit back and allow a handful of Big Tech oligarchs to determine the future of this revolutionary technology with no democratic input," Sanders said Thursday.
"AI was not created out of thin air. It was not a brilliant idea that just popped into Mark Zuckerberg’s head or Elon Musk’s imagination," he added. "The foundation of AI is based on the collective knowledge of humanity and the creative work of tens of millions of people. The American people must have the ability to slow it down and make sure that AI benefits humanity, not just the richest people on the planet. That’s precisely what this legislation does.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Report Details 'Human Rights Crisis' Wrought by Trump ICE Surge in Minnesota
“The federal government sent hordes of masked, armed agents to grab people off the street, whisk them away in shackles, and abuse those who sought to bear witness,” Human Rights Watch said of the deadly blitz.
Jun 18, 2026
Human Rights Watch on Thursday published a scathing report detailing how President Donald Trump "caused a human rights crisis" in Minnesota by ordering the deadly federal invasion of the Twin Cities in service of the administration's mass deportation agenda.
HRW called Operation Metro Surge, launched by Trump last December, "an unprecedented deployment of thousands of federal immigration agents and officers to the state of Minnesota," including members of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
"The Trump administration claimed that Operation Metro Surge was designed to keep Americans safe and often stated that it was targeting noncitizens with violent criminal histories," the report states. "But the operation itself caused significant harm, and nearly two out of three immigrants arrested by ICE during Operation Metro Surge had no prior US criminal history whatsoever."
At least three people have been killed in connection with the operation. ICE agent Jonathan Ross fatally shot Renée Good, a 37-year-old US citizen, in Minneapolis on January 7. A week later, 36-year-old Nicaraguan detainee Victor Manuel Díaz, who was arrested during the operation, became the third person to die at the notorious East Montana concentration camp in Texas. On January 24, CBP officer Raymundo Gutierrez and Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa shot and killed nurse Alex Pretti, 37, also in Minneapolis.
"Federal agents shot a third Minneapolis resident and pulled guns on dozens more," the report continues. "Agents also violently smashed car windows without justification, physically threw people to the ground who were not resisting arrest, and deployed chemical irritants and flash-bang grenades on dozens of occasions, sometimes at close range and without warning, resulting in injuries, including to journalists."
Furthermore, federal agents "unlawfully arrested and detained hundreds; engaged in racial profiling, harassment, and surveillance; and terrorized Minnesotans, chilling their rights to freedom of expression and assembly, and impacting their rights to education and health, among others," HRW said, adding that "residents faced further abuses when they collectively acted to protest, prevent, and stop these violations of their rights."
The HRW report calls for an immediate end to abusive federal enforcement operations in Minnesota; independent investigations into alleged unlawful killings, racial profiling, arbitrary arrests, excessive force, and other rights violations; and full accountability for officials responsible.
“The federal government sent hordes of masked, armed agents to grab people off the street, whisk them away in shackles, and abuse those who sought to bear witness,” Reagan Williams, HRW's crisis and conflict researcher, said in a statement. “Minnesotans mobilized to protest, to document abuse, and to provide critical aid to one another. National-level action is needed to ensure accountability, end ongoing abuses, remedy the harm, and prevent another crisis of this scale.”
“Operation Metro Surge put the violent and abusive practices of these agencies on full display,” Williams added. “We have clear proof of how they operate when impunity prevails, and we need to urgently chart a new way forward through accountability and structural reforms that put an end to these abuses.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Real Fight With Oligarchy Begins as Billionaires Tax Qualifies for Ballot in California
"David won the second round against Goliath, but healthcare workers and our allies won’t quit until we protect patients from the looming California healthcare collapse manufactured by Trump and Congress."
Jun 18, 2026
Advocates of a plan to tax California billionaires were celebrating Thursday following confirmation from California Secretary of State Shirley Weber that the proposal had gathered enough signatures to appear as a ballot initiative this November.
Weber revealed late Wednesday that proponents of the California Billionaire Tax Act had gathered more than the 875,000 signatures needed, reaching the benchmark ahead of June 25 deadline.
The proposed tax, which has drawn opposition from Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom and support from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), will hit the state’s billionaires with a one-time 5% wealth tax that proponents say will be used to fund local hospitals, food aid, and public education.
Proponents of the tax have called it necessary to make up for budget shortfalls created by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the 2025 Republican budget law that slashed spending on Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
Debru Carthan, a spokeswoman for the Billionaire Tax Now Coalition, said on Thursday that getting the proposed tax on the ballot puts the state "one step closer to saving the hospitals and emergency rooms that we all rely on" and that are being endangered by cuts imposed by the GOP law.
"With today’s news, David won the second round against Goliath," added Carthan, "but healthcare workers and our allies won’t quit until we protect patients from the looming California healthcare collapse manufactured by Trump and Congress."
A poll of California voters conducted in March by the University of California, Berkeley found that the proposed billionaire tax is broadly popular, with support outweighing opposition by a roughly two-to-one ratio.
An analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimates that the tax will raise $100 billion in revenue over the next five years, which would be enough to fill the hole in California’s state budget caused by the GOP cuts.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


