The WSJ is reporting on a proposal to, effectively, make the Fed a policy tool of the administration.
The article names names, so don’t click on the link if sensitive.
4 Likes
So… if the former guy wins I need to not only get my family out of here, but my money as well. Lovely.
9 Likes
Part of Project 2025 - if you’re looking for something to keep you up at night, it’s a good read.
I’ve always been bothered when presidents get most of the blame and credit for economic conditions during their terms. The economy is a slow moving beast that experiences impacts from prior administrations and Fed policy decisions. Seems like a great idea to give a disgruntled president who’s leaving office the ability to hose his/her successor.
5 Likes
Looks like the propaganda is proving effective. 
The Captain
5 Likes
Certain factions have, for years, styled the Fed as part of the unaccountable bureaucracy that is now styled as the “deep state”.
From Wiki:
3 Likes
What a great idea. What President, other than Jimmy Carter, is going to say “Yeah, raise rates thru the roof because stopping inflation is more important than me getting reelected”?
If this comes to pass I foresee a period of low low low interest rates, right up until you have to carry a wheelbarrow full of dollars to the store to get a loaf of bread.
12 Likes
That outcome will be blamed on “Commies” or “foreigners”, or whoever is the scapegoat of the month. We have seen all these moves before.
Steve…remembers when he said the US was becoming a banana republic
2 Likes
That makes the propaganda all the more credible, all the more effective!
Hint: It’s not about The Fed!
The Captain
2 Likes
It is popular with a certain faction, right along with that “unelected judges legislating from the bench” narrative.
Did you hear what Justice Jackson said in court about “immunity”?
Steve
4 Likes
No. Who is Justice Jackson?
The Captain
1 Like
One who doesn’t plan on needing to be elected to maintain power?
5 Likes
She sits on the SCOTUS.
3 Likes
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned Trump attorney D. John Sauer’s underlying assumption that official acts by a sitting president are immune from criminal prosecution while private acts are not.
That would not make sense. I would think the difference is who is in a position to hear the case. Ordinary courts in the case of private entities and Congress in the case of the president, specially about “official acts.”
I wonder if her question had any “English” on it.
The Captain
1 Like
Congress has no authority to try former presidents or any citizen for that matter. The defense is arguing the president should be able to commit any crime he wants and never prosecution.
4 Likes
You seem to have missed the sitting part of “sitting president.” 
The Captain
Acts committed by the sitting president, who is now a former president. Congress can only impeach sitting presidents.
The defense is arguing the president can commit any crime as long as he was president at the time.
3 Likes
While folks from both sides talk about leaving, in reality only super rich moves for their own reasons. Now, sorry for bringing party politics, I will take GOP proposals very seriously. The failure of Obama to put a fight for his SCOTUS nomination and subsequent election resulted in Roe v Wade thrown out and most parts of US is looking at severely restricted abortion rights to outright ban. Even when the economy was doing good we had Trillion $$ deficits under Trump, now under Biden. Whoever wins, I don’t see this is changing. So outright capture of Federal reserve and appointing a Yes man is a very real possibility. Don’t dismiss it. When politicians promise something that benefits you, it may or may not happen. If they even hint something like grapping more power, it will certainly happen.
Was the Fed ever, really, really, “independent”? I remember when the US was on it’s pay to paying off the Federal debt, only 25 years ago. Then a new regime came in, which wanted to hand out big tax cuts to the “JCs”. Fed Chairman Greenspan helped grease the skids for those deficit creating tax cuts, by defining a lack of Trillions in government debt, due to a budget in surplus and the debt being paid down, as a problem. So, Greenspan was aligned with administration policy in wanting the government to run up a big debt.
Steve
3 Likes
At the end of the day President appoints Fed chair, so there is going to be some policy alignment. This goes for almost all the administrative roles. However, the level of interference from WH is something that you need to be concerned. It is one thing you appoint a person who is aligned with you policy wise, but requiring that person to consult with the president and implement President’s directions on the interest rate is a very dangerous step.
Over the years POTUS has accumulated more power. We should look for ways to take away some of that power, and not empowering them with more.
5 Likes
Has that not been implicit all along? Greenspan was head of the Fed for five terms. At any point, a POTUS could have nominated someone else for the next term, if he didn’t like what Greenspan was doing. As it was, a second rate actor, an old line conservative, a southern moderate, and…well, whatever, were all satisfied with him. He had the job until he got out just before the economy collapsed, by “retiring” less than half way through his fifth term.
Steve
4 Likes