The White House has run a very public campaign for the nomination of the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has been open about how swiftly he would like to see a name chosen and shared with the public, while President Trump has been transparent about the individuals in contention.
One motivation for the candor is a bid to shift focus away from current chairman Jerome Powell, who has grated on the Oval Office by refusing to cut rates as fast as Trump might have liked.
With this in mind, Bessent in particular has lobbied to announce the Fed nomination sooner rather than later, even saying the announcement could be made before Christmas. With 10 days to go, that now seems unlikely, and the president has indicated the decision will instead be made in early 2026.
Even over the weekend, The Wall Street Journal reported Trump is eyeing two candidates in particular—Kevin Hassett and Kevin Warsh—for the job. Here’s what you need to know about the top contenders, and what their on-record opinions have been about the running of the Fed.
Kevin Hassett: Speaks with Trump daily
Kevin Hassett has been seen broadly as the frontrunner in this race. As director of the White House National Economic Council (NEC), Hassett claims he speaks with President Trump daily, and his appointment to the NEC suggests that Trump already values his outlook.
Hassett knows how to work with politicians, particularly Trump. From 2017 to 2019 he served as chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisors, and then was enlisted by the White House to serve as a senior advisor on the coronavirus pandemic. He has also worked with a roster of Republican politicians, serving as John McCain’s chief economic advisor in 2000, adviser to George W. Bush in 2004, and to Mitt Romney in 2012.
The conservative economist has also worked within the Fed before, in the 1990s, though not in decision-making or senior positions, unlike some of his rivals.
Hassett’s allegiance to the White House raises questions for investors, who generally prefer central banks that are firmly independent of politics. Like his peers, Hassett has expressed a dovish outlook on rates, which aligns with President Trump’s way of thinking.
The economist has also said he would take the views of the Oval Office directly to the Fed, while maintaining that it won’t sway the internal due diligence of the institution. Speaking on Face the Nation yesterday, Hassett said: “I think he has very strong and well-founded views about what we ought to do.
“But in the end, the job of the Fed is to be independent and to work with the group of people that are on the Board of Governors, at the FOMC, to drive a group consensus on where interest rates should be … with the guidance of the Fed chair. But in the end, it’s a committee that votes.
“And I’d be happy to talk to the president every day … until both of us are dead because it’s so much fun to talk.”
Previously, Hassett led polls by a significant margin according to odds site Kalshi. However, in recent days, he has lost some of that steam and now sits at a 50% likelihood.
Kevin Warsh: ‘inflation is a choice’
Picking up steam is Kevin Warsh, who now sits at odds of 40% on Kalshi.
Warsh has experience that spans the private sector, Capitol Hill, and senior roles within the Federal Reserve. The Stanford alumnus began his professional career at Morgan Stanley in 1995, before leaving in 2002 to serve in the administration of President George W. Bush.
Bush then nominated Warsh to the Fed’s Board of Governors in 2006. During this term, the Harvard alumnus served as the Board’s representative to the Group of Twenty (G-20) and as an emissary to the emerging and advanced economies in Asia.
Warsh left the Fed in 2011 and since then has served as a board member to UPS and Coupang, as well as acting as economic advisor to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). He is also a partner at Duquesne Family Office, the family office of legendary investor Stanley Druckenmiller.
Warsh is, like Hassett, dovish—but does not have the perception of being so closely linked with the White House. He made his differences with the Fed clear before his name was touted chairman. Explaining his position in a WSJ op-ed last month, Warsh argued that “AI will be a significant disinflationary force” and that “inflation is a choice, and the Fed’s track record under Chairman Jerome Powell is one of unwise choices. The Fed should re-examine its great mistakes that led to the great inflation. It should abandon the dogma that inflation is caused when the economy grows too much and workers get paid too much.”
He added: “The Fed is an institution whose reach has extended far beyond its grasp. Fundamental reform of monetary and regulatory policy would unlock the benefits of AI to all Americans. The economy would be stronger. Living standards would be higher. Inflation would fall further. And the Fed will have contributed to a new golden age.”
With the above in mind, Warsh wants to pull the Fed toward the “backseat” role that Treasury Secretary Bessent has recently begun lobbying for. On the sidelines of the IMF earlier this year, Warsh reportedly said: “The central bank should find new comfort in working without applause and without the audience at the edge of its seats.”
Christopher Waller: a familiar face to markets
Chris Waller is a familiar face to markets as he is a current member of the Fed’s board, beginning in December 2020 and ending in 2030.
Governor Waller’s name began circulating as a candidate given his departure from consensus voting on the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) earlier this year, advocating the more dovish route, which Trump said would be necessary to secure a nomination. Waller has also been optimistic about Trump’s policies, which may impact monetary policy, for example, saying the effect of tariffs has been “small so far.”
While Waller is a distinguished academic analysts have questioned whether the White House’s attention to Waller stems largely from his dissent from the wait-and-see stance of the Fed more broadly.
Back in July, when Waller and fellow Governor Michelle Bowman (also briefly seen by some as a potential chair) dissented from a decision to hold the base rate, UBS’s Paul Donovan observed: “Fed Chair Powell tried to present the two dissenting views as being rationally based, but investors are bound to suspect that the rationale amounted to little more than an excited jumping up and down and shouting ‘pick me, pick me’ in the general direction of the White House.”
Waller currently has Kalshi odds of 6%.
Rick Rieder: the outsider bet
Rick Rieder, chief investment officer of Global Fixed Income at BlackRock, is an outsider also on the list of candidates. Rieder has had a successful career in the private sector, including a stint at Lehman Brothers between 1987 and 2008, as R3 Capital Partners’ CEO and President, and is now responsible for managing $2.4 trillion at BlackRock.
Rieder has gained exposure to public sector bodies, having served as vice chairman of the Borrowing Committee for the U.S. Treasury and as a member of the Fed’s Investment Advisory Committee on Financial Markets. The exec’s odds aren’t great, sitting at 2%—that’s behind even Scott Bessent, who has repeatedly said he doesn’t want the job, both publicly and to President Trump himself.
Of course, investors have been surprised by President Trump before, so the odds must be taken with a pinch of salt. Rieder has been saying what the Oval Office wants to hear, continually advocating for rate cuts this year and arguing the economy is approaching normalcy. Rieder hasn’t been as outspoken in his criticism of the Fed—or its leadership and past decisions—as some of the other candidates vying for the job, but has shared a bullish view on the economy, which coincides with Trump’s calls for cuts.
What may have piqued the attention of Fed supporters is that Reider has previously warned analysts against viewing the Fed as a safety net, which purists will appreciate, given the argument that the Fed should focus on its mandate rather than financial markets. Back in 2020, Rieder told the Long View podcast: “I think [the Fed has] been amazingly thoughtful about how they’ve addressed these markets, and being thoughtful and innovative about how they do it. But I don’t believe in the thesis away from Treasuries and mortgages that you just follow the Fed willy-nilly, because the Fed is not trying to move prices in a certain area, certainly not in credit.”
He continued: “I hear it all the time, where people say, “You know, I’m buying (for example) investment-grade credit”–which by the way, we’re buying as well but in a slightly different way. But people say, “Gosh, if the Fed is in that, they are going to make sure that market holds up well.” I’m not sure I really believe that … I think there is too much overzealousness that, gosh, I’m going to be okay as long as the Fed is there without doing the credit work. I hear it all the time.”
