(New York Sun)
It’s hard to recall from the journalistic pack such a panic as has erupted over news that President Trump intends to name Stephen Moore and Herman Cain to the board of the Federal Reserve. The New York Times warns the Fed could end up under the presidential “thumb.” A “hideous specter,” says the Washington Post. “Sabotage” cries the Financial Times. They all bewail the Fed’s independence.
We’re tempted to say that all this solicitude over monetary policy warms the cockles of what’s left of our heart. Yet the fact of the matter is that none of them — neither of the two Timeses nor the Post — are worried about an independent monetary policy. If they were, they’d have been in the fight for the gold standard long ago. It’s the classical, constitutional way to keep monetary policy sound and honest.
Neither are they worried about the qualifications of either Messrs. Moore or Cain, though the Democratic press has been withering. Mr. Moore has been in the debate over economic policy his whole adult life, and Mr. Cain spent years on the board of — and chaired — the Kansas City Fed. (There’s a school of thought that reckons we need more representation of regional Feds on the board of governors.)
What the uproar over these prospective nominations reflects is the sudden realization that the President could well include monetary policy on the list of campaign promises he intends to keep. Remember? The Paris climate accord, Iran deal, Jerusalem embassy, tax cuts, full employment, rebuild the military, build the wall, conservative judges — can the Federal Reserve be far behind? Read more