Political Animal
Blog
Those of us hoping Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke would announce QE3 this morning were left disappointed. The Fed chief offered nothing in the way of measures to boost the economy in the short term.
This is not to say, however, that Bernanke’s remarks weren’t interesting. Politically, he had quite a few noteworthy thoughts, and, with varying degrees of subtlety, went after Congress in general — and congressional Republicans in specific — on three key areas.
First, the debt-ceiling fight wasn’t just political scandal; Bernanke said it did real damage.
“Bouts of sharp volatility and risk aversion in markets have recently re-emerged in reaction to concerns about both European sovereign debts and developments related to the U.S. fiscal situation, including the recent downgrade of the U.S. long-term credit rating by one of the major rating agencies and the controversy concerning the raising of the U.S. federal debt ceiling. It is difficult to judge by how much these developments have affected economic activity thus far, but there seems little doubt that they have hurt household and business confidence and that they pose ongoing risks to growth. […]
“The negotiations that took place over the summer disrupted financial markets and probably the economy as well, and similar events in the future could, over time, seriously jeopardize the willingness of investors around the world to hold U.S. financial assets or to make direct investments in job-creating U.S. businesses.”
Bernanke had pleaded with congressional Republicans not to hold the debt ceiling hostage, and Republicans promptly ignored him. Now the Fed chief is, in effect, reminding them that they were wrong — and that their radical stunt undermined the United States in a variety of ways.
The problem, however, is that Republicans don’t give a damn. They held the nation hostage, they hurt the economy, they generated a downgrade, they undermined global confidence in the United States, and as Greg Sargent reminds us this morning, they intend to make permanent the very tactics Bernanke warned against today.
Second, the Fed chief alluded to the need for Congress approving some economic stimulus.
“Normally, monetary or fiscal policies aimed primarily at promoting a faster pace of economic recovery in the near term would not be expected to significantly affect the longer-term performance of the economy. However, current circumstances may be an exception to that standard view—the exception to which I alluded earlier. Our economy is suffering today from an extraordinarily high level of long-term unemployment, with nearly half of the unemployed having been out of work for more than six months. Under these unusual circumstances, policies that promote a stronger recovery in the near term may serve longer-term objectives as well. In the short term, putting people back to work reduces the hardships inflicted by difficult economic times and helps ensure that our economy is producing at its full potential rather than leaving productive resources fallow. In the longer term, minimizing the duration of unemployment supports a healthy economy by avoiding some of the erosion of skills and loss of attachment to the labor force that is often associated with long-term unemployment. […]
“Fortunately, the two goals of achieving fiscal sustainability — which is the result of responsible policies set in place for the longer term — and avoiding the creation of fiscal headwinds for the current recovery are not incompatible. Acting now to put in place a credible plan for reducing future deficits over the longer term, while being attentive to the implications of fiscal choices for the recovery in the near term, can help serve both objectives.
“Fiscal policymakers can also promote stronger economic performance through the design of tax policies and spending programs. To the fullest extent possible, our nation’s tax and spending policies should increase incentives to work and to save, encourage investments in the skills of our workforce, stimulate private capital formation, promote research and development, and provide necessary public infrastructure. We cannot expect our economy to grow its way out of our fiscal imbalances, but a more productive economy will ease the tradeoffs that we face.”
He added, “Most of the economic policies that support robust economic growth in the long run are outside the province of the central bank,” reminding Congress this is the legislative branch’s job, not the Fed’s.
This is, as Jared Bernstein noted, “as strong an endorsement of a robust, short-term jobs plan as you’ll get from a Fed chief.”
And third, Bernanke shot down the Republicans’ top goal: quickly and immediately taking money out of the economy, lessening demand, and imposing short-term austerity measures. The Fed chairman reminded GOP leaders:
“Although the issue of fiscal sustainability must urgently be addressed, fiscal policymakers should not, as a consequence, disregard the fragility of the current economic recovery.”
Taken together, Bernanke didn’t offer QE3, but he did offer a fairly unambiguous rejection of the entire Republican economic agenda.

























Bob m on August 26, 2011 12:47 PM:
Why can't the admin be a little less opaque about who did harm?
c u n d gulag on August 26, 2011 12:47 PM:
And here are the Republicans, shooting holes in the bottom of the boat, bitching that Obama and the Democrats aren't bailing the water out fast enough.
Not enough bad shit can happen to these people.
And sadly, not enough bad shit will...
Hedda Peraz on August 26, 2011 12:49 PM:
Clearly, Bernanke has been taking uppity lessons from Obama. It is time to abolish the Federal Reserve, and go back to simpler times, when business was transacted with gold, and silver. And beaver pelts. . .
Josef K on August 26, 2011 12:52 PM:
There's one critical problem here: Bernanke was using big words of more than two syllables, which no doubt immediately turned off any Republican officeholder listening.
Snark aside, he might as well have been speaking Farsi, as I doubt either the Republicans nor much of the public are likely to have understood his points. I have Masters degree and spent years studying economics, and I barely understood him.
Add to that the inevitable public confusion over the role of the Fed in our government - confusion fed by a steady diet of Republican lies - and I'm left to wonder if there was any possible impact to this speech. Action on the Feds part, even if only another round of QE, would've been a better effort.
KC on August 26, 2011 12:54 PM:
Amen Hedda Paraz. Hard currency is excellent. I think it worked wonders in the late 19th century, like after the panic of 1893 when the government had to borrow gold from JP Morgan to prop up the currency. Excellent monetary system, far superior to what we have today.
Steven Donegal on August 26, 2011 12:56 PM:
To quote Officer Obie:
And he talked for 45 minutes and no one understood a word that he said.
Bernanke can talk til he's blue in the face and the Rs won't care. All they are interested in is tanking Obama and if they have to take the economy down to do it, they will.
DisgustedWithItAll on August 26, 2011 1:01 PM:
Are Peraz and KC for real?
Trollop of Emo on August 26, 2011 1:02 PM:
Economic stimulus?! What are we, socialist democrats?!! We just need two more wars Mr. Bernanke!
stevio on August 26, 2011 1:03 PM:
Bunk. If Obama handled this and other recent events with a shade of the "audacity of hope" he talked about in his book that got him elected in the first place, we'd be no further behind and at very least his left-leaning backers (now leaving him in droves) would be commanding and demanding equal time that the press is giving to the villagers.
He's become one of the weakest presidents in recent memory. Even one of the dumbest ones we ever had (Bushit) turned his nose at the dems when they had control of congress. Obama's inability to play hardball has been and will continue to lead to his one term demise.
Nauseating...
Jimo on August 26, 2011 1:05 PM:
I don't believe the motto "No man left behind" is the official motto of any military group but it seems to be used universally.
Obama needs to start using it daily with reference to the long-term unemployed. If there's one cancerous theme that has taken root in modern America it's the idea that our individual fortunes can be separated from our collective ends. (See: Why allowing your neighbor to borrow a no-interest, no payment liar mortgage hurts your own bottom line.)
While there are some piddly funds for "training" for long-term unemployed, in our present situation that's only a portion of them. The USG needs to commit substantial funds attached to each person who can show long-term unemployment ($25k maybe) than can, with some restrictions, be paid out to any employer who hires one of these people and keeps them on the payroll over the next 2 years. It needs to be large enough to tempt most employers. (Alternatively, you could do the same indirectly by allowing tax write offs for substantial increases in employer-portions of SS taxes paid.)
What would be shocking to many is that this direct cash outlays--bribery really--would be cheaper than any of the alternatives - including just cutting off all funding and leaving these people behind, out of sight and out of mind. Even a modest improvement, such as getting unemployment rates down to 8%, would pay enormous dividends in improved confidence, growth, consumer buying power, and tax revenues.
danimal on August 26, 2011 1:11 PM:
Stevio--are you paid by Republicans, or do you do their work for free?
DisgustedWithItAll on August 26, 2011 1:34 PM:
stevio is correct.
hells littlest angel on August 26, 2011 1:57 PM:
DisgustedWithItAll: As far as Hedda Peraz goes, I suggest you say her name out loud a few times.
Hedda Peraz on August 26, 2011 2:19 PM:
The next president of the United States agrees that we should abolish the Federal reserve.
But, what do I know? I'm just a little old Texan, whose sight grows dim. And hells littlest angel knows why. . .
msmolly on August 26, 2011 3:35 PM:
I agree with Stevio. X2.
Gregory on August 26, 2011 5:18 PM:
From Greg Sargent's post:
[Bernanke] flatly states that the brinkmanship around the debt ceiling may have damaged the recovery
I'm sure the Republicans are just all busted up over that outcome.
Rick B on August 26, 2011 9:06 PM:
@Disgusted
No, both Peraz and AK were indulging in snark.
There's a reason why FDR took the US off the gold standard and Nixon stopped paying for the trade deficit in gold. No government can function financially in a hard currency environment. Warren Mosler clearly describes how a government that is borrowing in its own currency creates and destroys money simply by changing what government account it is in. Borrowed money does not have to be paid back and it does not come out of the current economy. But it has real economic effects, so money can be borrowed today to put people to work without an adverse effects on the economy. Later when the economy improves it simple expands. The danger might be inflation, but right now and in the foreseeable future putting people to work only expands the economy.
Bankers and accountants operate under different rules and find the environment the government operates in frightening and confusing.
Check the link. It's a pdf with an excellent summary after two blank pages. It's recommended by Jay Galbraith at the University of Texas.
average guy on September 23, 2011 4:54 PM:
Steve Benen, are you Jewish? Because there's no other reason to defend Bernanke like you do. Nothing the man has done is for the betterment of the avereage guy, but only for the betterment of the private Jewish-owned Federal Reserve Bank. You'd like for nothing he does to be questioned, because that would be the old tired phrase "anti-semetism". You've completely lost your sense of economics in favor of blindly supporting one of your own.