There is all sorts of scuttlebutt over getting rid of Ben Bernanke. Two Democratic senators, Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold both started stirring up things on Friday about not re-confirming the current Federal Reserve Chairman. Before that, there were other democrats including Senate Leader Harry Reid who expressed doubts. There are already Republicans who place the financial woes on the country onto Bernanke, saying he should have known before hand.
While the Democrats and Republicans play political reindeer games, some of those who have forgotten more than most people know about all things financial seem horrified at the prospect of not having Bernanke at the helm. Warren Buffett, the financial mogul, is one such person. He has said if Bernanke is not reconfirmed he will immediately begin to sell off stock and put his money elsewhere. Wall Street dropped 4% last week over this fighting as well as Obama’s firmly administered bank spanking.
According to Foxnews.com:
Bernanke met with Reid, D-Nev., on Thursday as Democratic and Republican leaders surveyed senators to tally votes on the nomination. Reid said Friday that his support “is not unconditional. … The Senate will continue to demand visible and responsible results for the people we represent.”
Bernanke needs 60 supporters to win approval for another four-year term, meaning the White House will have to rely on at least some Republican senators.
“A few Democrats have publicly said they won’t vote for Mr. Bernanke’s appointment, so you need Republican support,” said Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill.
Democratic Sens. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Barbara Boxer of California and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin are among those who say they plan to vote against the nomination.
“It is time for a change — it is time for Main Street to have a champion at the Fed. Dr. Bernanke played a lead role in crafting the Bush administration’s economic policies, which led to the current economic crisis. Our next Federal Reserve chairman must represent a clean break from the failed policies of the past,” Boxer said in a written statement Friday.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who votes with Democrats, has led the charge from the left against Mr. Bernanke and also plans a “no” vote.
Other folks I know personally who deal with finance and Wall Street daily are very worried that politics is going to tank the slowly recovering economy. Many with financial smarts back Bernanke while admitting to a few unforeseen missteps along the way.
The White House said today that it feels it has to votes to reconfirm Ben Bernanke. Oddly enough, through all this fighting, Bernanke is a Republican who was appointed by George W. Bush. Investors should watch this maneuver very closely. Bernanke’s term runs out January 31. (ssshhhhh don’t tell Rush but Bernanke is also Jewish.)
The best part is listening to people whine about their 401Ks and cheering the “bank spanking”. God, could people be that stupid?
What responsibility do you see that the banks have in all this mess? Where do we draw the line betwen wall street and the banks?
I believe we need regulation but not punishment. I am not really sure where the punishment fits in. Good guys and bad guys get treated the same.
Bernanke must stay though.
Definitely calling for a Tea Party to protest the outcome of the NFC Championship game. What’s up with pass interference call giving the Saints the ball on the 30?!?! They stopped the game three times on one drive for instant replay but they can’t pick up the flag when the ball is clearly uncatchable?
Bernanke? I guess he should stay just so we have some stability. It’s kind of like leaving the knife in after a deep stab wound. Your instinct is to rip it out of there, but then you end up bleeding to death. Obama may be right to keep some of the knifes from the previous administration in the body politic until our economic vital signs are stable again.
That’s what I like to hear. Blame Bush! Do it early, do it often, and for God’s sake, do it openly and loudly! You’ve got a never-ending pass by playing the “It’s Bush’s Fault” card. The moderates will ALWAYS run straight back to you if you’ll just blame Bush! I’m praying each and every day that the Democrats will base the 2010 election on blaming Bush. Keep it coming, please!
It makes as much sense as blaming Obama which seems to be the mantra now. Why blame either of them for the economy? It is what it is. It didn’t happen overnight. It wasn’t going to cure instantly when Obama stepped into office.
The question is Bernanke. He must stay. Not the time to change horses midstream. This should not be a time to go all political.
There is no model to cure the economy. A total financial disaster was avoided fall of 2008.
I just heard on tv 10 minutes ago that the mini crash last week was Obama’s fault. Huh? The entire stock market can be blamed on Obama? How about a correction? That was ignorant on the part of yes…..some Faux New ‘reporter.’
Recall that Congress has more power than the President and that during the Bush period, there was an enormous dissatisfaction rate with Congress.
Bernake will be confirmed, but the Obama administration shouldn’t have had to carry water for him to get him confirmed. There seems to be an opinion forming that the White House needs to crack a few heads in Congress and get back in charge of their agenda, instead of letting it run to the schedule of the House and Senate leadership. I think that’s going to be the Administration’s main take-away from last weeks election. Be more forceful with Congress (particularly Democrats in Congress.) Time (specifically November) will tell if that’s the right strategy or not.
I expect Geithner will be leaving by the Spring, assuming there is some good economic news somewhere along the way for him to leave to. If not, he may linger until the Summer, but either way, he’s out before November. His leaks last week are a clear side he’s leaving.
It’s been too busy for us to run an update on the Congressional races, but anecdotal evidence says it’s been a bad month for Democrats. Retirements in Republican leaning districts and some bad luck with candidates could potentially put a Republican takeover of the House as possible, although very unlikely. With that said, if the November 2010 electorate looks anything at all like the voters that showed up in Massachusetts last week, November could be a disaster. Black voters basically stayed at home. The Union vote was nearly an even split and Independents broke 2-1. Yes, Coakley was a bad candidate but at some point after Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, you start wondering why aren’t Democratic primary voters selecting better candidates.
If the Democrats in Congress can’t pull it together, maybe they don’t deserve to be in control. Of course, I think both parties are just full of fools. Even those who aren’t fools become fools once they beome part of the body of Congress.
Each party seems to have too many tails wagging the dog.
Formerly, thanks for the update. And I am very glad that Bernake will be reconfirmed. Devil we know and all.
Ohhhh, slight difference. One is currently President, the other is not. Very slight difference, I grant you, but a small difference nonetheless!!
So the fact that it precisely coincided with the “spank the banks” announcements from Obumbles, and banks led the way down……that’s just coincidence, right?
That hit its low during the last couple years when Congress was Democrat-controlled, only to be bested by the current Congress, down to 18% approval according to gallup.
Don’t follow the markets real closely apparently. Let’s look at action vs reaction.
Whose fault was today? Obama still president?
Today wasn’t anyone’s fault, nothing happened. It’s widely known in investment circles that whenever Obama opens his yap (which he apparently doesn’t do enough), the market takes a dump. I’m buying silver these days, so the more Obama devalues the dollar, the better for me.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Same thing used to happen when Bush or Bernanke spoke fall of 2008. You can’t very well muzzle a president.
Slow, I would feel much better about our discussions if you didn’t have such a short memory. It is difficult to carry on a conversation with someone when the premise is all Democrats are bad and all Republicans are good. Can they each have good points and bad points?
Oh dear. I have an entire novel for a response, but I just can’t muster the energy. For someone who considers all Democrats bad, I’ve sure made my fondness of Bill Clinton known, and I voted for Jim Webb in 06, and wouldn’t take it back. If Webb votes against Amnesty (if it comes up this year), I’ll likely vote for him again. I’ve repeatedly voice my distaste for McCain, Graham, Snowe and Collins. But I have the short memory, huh?
The Fed just announced they are going to keep rates low “for an extended period”
For the younger people here, if you ever wondered what living in 1972-1974 felt like economically, hold on to your hats, because stagflation is a coming. It’s not pretty, but the only good news is that you can defend yourself against stagflation if you have some flexibility in your income sources. (Which is a polite way of saying that once again the Federal Government is pushing policies that are going to hurt the poor and middle class while the wealthy are relatively unscathed.)