Not all smart people want a no-currency economy. Having all transactions being electronic means that it's super easy for financial institutions and the feds to track every single purchase you make. It's none of their business to know that much detail.
Who says it has to be all-or-nothing? I'm not saying people shouldn't be able to pay with bills, just that more people would use electronic means of payment of it were free, and that the government might come out ahead. I'm not thrilled by taxes going to pay for all the logistics of dealing with pennies and quarters, which are evidently nontrivial.
This sounds like a problem with immediate impact which will eventually (1-2 years?) go away. Creating a new payment system, deploying it widely, getting people to use it, all takes way longer than that time period.
They could build on the Direct Express debit Mastercard system that already exists to give social security (and other federal payers) a place to direct deposit funds for people who don't have a bank account.
You'd need a way to get money on the card, but that could be ATM deposits, presumably.
You're going to have to give us more information than this. Sure, lots of business models "prey on poor people", but which ones of those are threatened by electronic wallets?
Depending on what that phrase "universal banking" entails, sure. It is the case that some good loans are not being made because of the perceived risks of particular potential borrowers. I don't think free electronic wallets are going to help with that, however. Lots of bad loans are also avoided due to the perceived risk of the potential borrowers. An electronic wallet isn't going to help differentiate this.