“I do believe,” Miran said early in the hearing, “there needs to be a fulsome process at the Fed for thinking about not only the benefits of regulations but the costs as well.”
Miran’s views on Basel III needn’t concern us here. But Miran’s use—or perhaps misuse—of the word fulsome intrigues me because for centuries fulsome was associated with the word “foul” and meant “too much,” especially with respect to praise; fulsome praise meant “sycophancy.” By the late twentieth century, though, so many ignoramuses used fulsome to mean “abundant” that the dictionaries cried uncle and approved both definitions.
Miran’s fulsome tendencies were the main subject of inquiry at the hearing. Invited early on by the committee’s Republican chair, Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, to assert his independence, Miran said that if confirmed “I will act independently, as the Federal Reserve always does, based on my own personal analysis.” But he added: “I’m always happy to hear views from every source possible.” That made it sound as if Trump were just one of many people—taxi driver, bartender, president—who might disagree with Miran about interest rates and, by golly, deserved a fair hearing. Later, Miran said “the president is entitled to a view on appropriate monetary policy as is everyone else with an interest in the subject, and I welcome everyone sharing their views.” He said it was a welcome opportunity to “interrogate” his own presumptions, sounding almost like a DEI facilitator.
Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Nevada, pointed out that Miran was contradicting a Manhattan Institute paper about reforming the Fed that he coauthored last year. In that paper, Miran said board members “should be prohibited from serving in the executive branch for four years following the end of their term.” That didn’t jibe with Miran returning to chair the Council of Economic Advisers.
Whenever Miran got called on any such contradiction, he recited some variation on the following: The paper set forth “a suite of checks and balances, and it’s highly inappropriate to take one check or balance outside the context of the overall package.” (Yes, he actually said “highly inappropriate,” as if this were a matter of constitutional law.) Senator John Warren, Democrat of Virginnia, later called bullshit on that by pointing out that the Manhattan Institute paper said, “Our proposal can be implemented in a piecemeal fashion, one policy at a time, if legislatively easier.”
Warren: Did Donald Trump lose the 2020 presidential election?
That’s the standard dodge. Warren repeated the question twice more and Miran repeated his answer twice more.
Miran: “The Bureau of Labor Statistics data on various measures has deteriorated steadily in quality over time.”
Senator Andy Kim, Democrat of New Jersey, later asked whether anybody in the administration asked Miran to commit himself to lowering interest rates. Miran said no, which almost certainly was a lie.
At the hearing, Kennedy apologized for Warren’s rude questions and asked Miran point blank: “Are you Donald Trump’s puppet?”
But Miran proved exactly the opposite when Senator Raphael Warnock, Democrat of Georgia, asked whether the economy would be better off if Trump were able to set interest rates “unilaterally.”
“I think the president has had a series of excellent calls on monetary policy,” Miran replied, before reciting the dutiful catechism that “the independence of the central bank from the political cycle is key to its long-term success.” A more fulsome answer can scarcely be imagined.
Hence then, the article about trump s fed nominee plays the sycophant was published today ( ) and is available on The New Republic ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Trump’s Fed Nominee Plays the Sycophant )
Also on site :