Among the many ambitions and unfulfilled promises that echo through the halls of the White House, few carry the weight of Ronald Reagan’s deep and lasting regret over not returning the United States to a gold standard. This single decision, a ghost of an opportunity missed, highlights a fundamental but often overlooked truth about presidential authority: the ultimate power to define the American dollar rests not with the Federal Reserve, but within the Oval Office itself. The stage is now set for a successor to seize the authority that Reagan relinquished and fundamentally reshape the nation’s monetary future.
A President’s Greatest Regret and an Unfulfilled Promise
Ronald Reagan campaigned for the presidency in 1980 on a powerful economic platform, famously arguing that no great nation had ever survived on a diet of “fiat money”—currency untethered to a precious metal. He promised a return to sound money, a principle that resonated with a public weary of inflation. Yet, as political columnist Robert Novak later recounted, Reagan considered his failure to reinstate the gold standard one of his greatest regrets. This was not a minor oversight but a core promise left unfulfilled, a decision that haunts his otherwise transformative legacy.
The forces that dissuaded Reagan were formidable, primarily a consensus among establishment economists, including figures like Milton Friedman, who had previously convinced President Richard Nixon to abandon gold entirely. They argued that a floating, government-managed currency was essential for modern economic flexibility. Reagan, despite his instincts, ultimately yielded to this expert class, leaving the door open for a future leader to challenge that very consensus and finish the work he started.
The President’s Ultimate Power Over the Dollar
The common perception of the Federal Reserve as the undisputed master of American monetary policy obscures a more profound constitutional reality. While the Fed manages interest rates and money supply, the U.S. President holds the unilateral power to define the value of the dollar itself. This authority is not merely symbolic; it is a decisive executive tool that has been used to reshape the nation’s financial destiny at critical junctures, often in direct opposition to the will of the central bank.
This presidential prerogative means that a determined commander-in-chief can, through executive action, fundamentally alter the monetary system without congressional approval or the Federal Reserve’s consent. The central bank can advise, protest, and even see its leadership resign, but it cannot ultimately stop a president from redefining what a dollar is worth. History provides a clear and dramatic record of this power in action, demonstrating that when the White House decides to act, the Fed is rendered a secondary player.
How Presidents Have Defined America’s Money Through Executive Action
In 1933, the nation witnessed a stunning display of this executive power. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, confronting the Great Depression, unilaterally devalued the dollar against gold to combat deflation. The move was met with fierce opposition from Federal Reserve Chairman Eugene Meyer, who viewed it as a reckless betrayal of sound money principles. Despite Meyer’s strenuous objections and eventual resignation in protest, Roosevelt’s decision stood. The showdown was not a negotiation; it was a clear assertion of presidential dominance that redefined the dollar for a generation and proved the Fed was ultimately subordinate.
Nearly four decades later, another president exercised this same authority, but with a profoundly different outcome. In 1971, President Richard Nixon, facing international pressure on U.S. gold reserves, made the momentous decision to completely sever the dollar’s link to gold. This “Nixon Shock” effectively ended the Bretton Woods system and launched the modern era of global fiat currencies. Fed Chairman Arthur Burns pleaded with the president to reconsider, but his advice was ignored. Nixon’s unilateral action, taken against the counsel of his top central banker, stands as the most significant monetary event of the last half-century and a monumental error that a future president is uniquely positioned to correct.
Why Trump is Uniquely Positioned to Reverse a 50-Year Mistake
Donald Trump’s political identity is built on defying institutional norms and challenging the established expert class, making him a uniquely suitable candidate to reverse Nixon’s decision. A return to the gold standard would represent the ultimate repudiation of the modern economic establishment—the “PhD class” that has presided over decades of currency debasement. For a leader who revels in disrupting the status quo, the opportunity to overturn 50 years of entrenched economic policy would be an irresistible challenge and a powerful symbol of his populist mandate.
Beyond the ideological victory, reinstating a gold-backed dollar offers a direct and compelling appeal to his political base. By anchoring the currency to a tangible asset, a president could guarantee that the value of American wages and savings would be protected from the silent theft of government-induced inflation. This message—that hard-earned money will hold its value—is a potent political tool that transforms a complex economic issue into a tangible promise of financial security for working families. It would also allow Trump to surpass the legacy of a conservative icon, accomplishing the one major goal that Ronald Reagan himself could not.
A Framework for Reinstating a Gold-Backed Dollar
The historical precedents set by Roosevelt and Nixon provide a clear roadmap for a modern president to re-anchor the dollar to gold through decisive executive action. Such a move would not be a mere policy adjustment but a fundamental restoration of stability to the U.S. and global economies. By defining the dollar as a fixed weight of gold, the president would reintroduce a predictable and reliable measure of value, curbing the ability of central bankers and politicians to manipulate the currency for short-term political gain. This act would signal a return to fiscal discipline and long-term economic strength.
The restoration of a gold-backed dollar represented more than an economic policy; it was an opportunity to secure a legacy of historic proportions, one with more lasting prestige than any international prize. It offered a path to create a stable economic foundation that would benefit not only the United States but the entire world. The power to make this change was always there, waiting for a leader with the conviction to use it, and the moment had finally arrived to correct a decades-old mistake.
