Ordinarily, the reconfirmation of a sitting Federal Reserve Board Chairman would be fairly non-controversial.
These, however, are not ordinary times:
Amidst the voter anger at Wall Street and Washington, D.C., ABC News has learned that the Senate Democratic leadership isn’t sure there are enough votes to re-confirm Ben Bernanke for another term as chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Bernanke’s term expires on Jan. 31.
The White House did not respond to many requests for comment.
“The American people are disgusted with the greed and recklessness of Wall Street,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said in an interview with The Associated Press last month. “People are asking, ‘Why didn’t the Fed intervene at the appropriate time to stop the casino-type activities of large financial companies?’”
Sanders, Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and Sen. David Vitter, R-La., have all put holds on Bernanke’s nomination, requiring 60 votes to proceed to a vote.
(…)
Roll Call reported this week that at the Senate Democratic caucus meeting on Wednesday, “according to senators, liberals spoke out against confirming Bernanke for a second term. Those liberals tried to make the case that the White House needs to put in place fresh economic advisers to focus on ‘Main Street’ issues like unemployment rather than Wall Street concerns. Moderates were more reserved, senators said, but have similarly withheld their support for Bernanke.”
Couldn’t happen to a more well deserving guy.
January 22nd, 2010 at 11:56 am
Wouldn’t it be great to see him go from Time’s Person of the Year to unemployed in less than a month? Who says that something good can’t come from partisan politics?
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:03 pm
If only his job were in jeopardy due to inflationary monetary policy. :/
January 22nd, 2010 at 2:06 pm
> ‘Why didn’t the Fed intervene at the appropriate time to stop the casino-type activities of large financial companies?’
Uh…. because the Fed has nothing to do with that? Try the SEC or FTC or whatever this new agency they’re creating is. Or the politicians who encouraged shaky lending practices. The reason to be angry with Bernanke (and Paulson) is for the bailouts and the forcing of capital upon banks that did not want it.
January 22nd, 2010 at 6:46 pm
This is not about Massachusetts vote or about taxpayers “footing the bill” for Wall Street recklessness (fraud). This is about a deepening economic problem in the US and possible global consequence. Congress and the President are never upfront – the public finds out much later about what is really going on. The US economy is very fragile. People are concerned about their homes and their jobs. Congress gave away American jobs to appease corporate (manufacturing) CEOs, and then Congress gave away homes to appease financial institutions. Media must stop blaming the American public. People were defrauded into believing homes were worth much more due to Wall Street greed and that there would be jobs to replace manufacturing. None of this really happened. Congress and Wall Street extorted everything they could from the American people. The people lost everything – but CEOs gained everything. Now, the administration, and Congress, must face the political consequence. The US financial service reputation has been destroyed – what do we have left?? This is far more frightening and serious than the media/Congress/Administration has led us to believe. Value of the dollar, and America’s future,is at stake. The Federal Reserve and US Treasury also know far more than they are revealing.
January 23rd, 2010 at 8:52 am
Great writing here. I enjoyed reading this article. I hope you can keep up the good work.
January 24th, 2010 at 3:09 pm
Can you say Chairman Summers three times quickly without gagging?
January 25th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
[...] Doug Mataconis at Below The Beltway [...]