The Federal Reserve's moral imperative
The Federal Reserve is usually understood as the bankers' bank. But what if it was the people's bank? At the Fed's...
The Federal Reserve is usually understood as the bankers' bank. But what if it was the people's bank?
At the Fed's annual Jackson Hole conference last week, an assortment of community organizers, activists, labor organizations, and economists showed up to push America's most important financial institution towards putting the concerns of working and nonwhite Americans at the center of monetary policy. The group, called Fed Up, has met with Federal Reserve officials before, but Thursday's meeting was nonetheless unprecedented and striking — both for being on the record, and for the detailed, impassioned, occasionally heated, and remarkably pointed conversation that resulted.
Fed Up's complaints are several. The Fed is too worried about inflation, the activists say, and not worried enough about pushing the boundaries of maximum employment when it sets interest rates. They also argue the population of Fed officials is not diverse enough along racial, gender or class lines, and that the Fed itself could do with some institutional reform.
To a large extent, Fed officials agreed: "I'd be surprised if anyone in the Federal Reserve thinks we've done well on [diversity]," said New York Fed President William Dudley. "We're going to run this economy hot. Get unemployment down lower," added San Francisco Fed President John Williams. "So I don't think we disagree about that basic view."
And in Fed official's defense, some of this balancing is a judgment call. The Fed's inflation target is 2 percent, but since that is neither a ceiling nor a floor, officials must decide how far to overshoot that target and for how long in the name of spurring job growth. There is also generally a lag time between a change in interest rates and when it's felt in the economy. So Fed officials have to make educated guesses about when to drop rates to firm up a stumbling economy or raise them to get ahead of inflation.
Finally, Fed officials themselves can disagree over the full extent of their powers. That point was illustrated in Thursday's meeting when Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren and Fed Vice Chair Stanley Fischer disagreed over just what tools the Fed has to deal with asset bubbles. (Rosengren argued there were lots of tools while Fischer insisted there were few.)
The first complication here is that, even from a technical perspective, it's hard to see why the Fed is even contemplating another interest rate hike in December. Rod Adams, a neighborhood organizer from Minneapolis, noted in a particularly impassioned moment that there's essentially no indication that inflation is on the rise. Fed officials' own projections show inflation will just barely touch 2 percent through 2018. Josh Bivens, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute who joined Fed Up at Jackson Hole, argued that fully healing the damage from the Great Recession will require a prolonged period of overshooting the Fed's inflation target.
And in truth, none of the Fed officials at the meeting really debated any of these points. What did come up was the threat of asset bubbles and financial instability. "One of the ways that you get maximum employment is that you don't allow excesses to build up to the point that you actually have another recession, which hurts everybody in the room," Rosengren said.
This is where the unspoken moral problem of Fed policy really becomes inescapable. In very broad terms, the effects of lower interest rates and higher inflation tend to fall harder on the more fortunate members of society: retirees with savings portfolios, people with financial assets, those who work in the financial industry, and so on. Meanwhile, the effects of raising interest rates and slowing down jobs and wage growth tend to fall hardest on the least fortunate: Racial minorities, people with only a high school education, or people with prior criminal records.
At any given moment, unemployment for African-Americans is roughly double the national unemployment rate. But that gap tends to close during boom times and widen during downturns. "The economy has recovered for much of white America, but for black and Latino workers it has not," said Adams. "If you decide that we're at maximum employment now and you intentionally slow down the economy, you'll be leaving us behind, pulling up the ladder right after you've climbed it."
The brutal truth is that when the Fed slows down the economy by raising rates, it is throwing people out of work. And the people most likely to be thrown out of work first are those forced to the fringes of the labor market already by discrimination and other circumstances. So raising interest rates to fight financial instability essentially means black, Latino, and other underprivileged workers are the first to be thrown on the sacrificial alter to save us all from Wall Street's irrational exuberance.
This is partly why Fed Up is pushing for more racial and gender diversity among Fed officials, and to remove the financial industry from its privileged position among those officials. The idea is that the voices of those people the Fed will help or harm should all be equally heard in its deliberations. Fed officials may agree on running the economy hot for a while, but the lack of those voices may be hiding just how hot we need to run it.
There are practical policy changes the Fed could make as well. Bivens has released work on alternative tools the Fed could develop to pop bubbles without causing all that collateral damage: Higher capital requirements for banks, more use of its research powers and public relations to alert the markets to bubbles, and other ideas that already lie in the scope of the Fed's powers. Rosengren said the Fed should use all tools at its disposal to fight financial instability. But if Fed officials are looking for practical ways to build Fed Up's concerns more fully into its ways of doing business, it could start by developing those tools and explicitly rejecting interest rate hikes as a way to combat bubbles.
Another would be to adopt a higher inflation rate target like 3 percent or even 4 percent. If the effects of maximum employment take longer to reach marginalized communities, then the 2 percent target is driving the Fed to cut off job growth before those communities can ever heal.
It should be noted, as Fed Up activists did, that within the scope of its tools, the Fed has actually done a far better job maximizing jobs for marginalized Americans than Congress or the state governments. To some extent, the Fed is catching heat because these it's actually willing to listen to reason.
But it's long been said that societies are judged by how they treat their weakest and most vulnerable citizens — that the powerless have a uniquely powerful claim on our responsibilities. And Thursday reminded us that truism applies to the Fed too.
By Jeff Spross
Source
Obscure Fed Tool Used to Hammer Yellen for Enriching Banks
Source:...
Source: Bloomberg Business
A tool Congress gave the Federal Reserve to control interest rates has become a hammer for lawmakers to bash the central bank.
Fed Chair Janet Yellen withstood bipartisan criticism at a congressional hearing on Wednesday over the policy of paying the largest financial institutions to keep more funds than required on deposit at the central bank. The Fed doled out $1.7 billion in interest on excess reserves -- known as IOER for short -- to banks in the third quarter.
Congress, which gave the Fed authority in 2008 to pay interest on excess reserves, may be having second thoughts. While the tool helps the Fed raise its benchmark interest rate and simultaneously maintain a $4.5 trillion balance sheet that policy makers say supports the economy, several lawmakers complained to Yellen that IOER is enriching Wall Street.
California Representative Maxine Waters, the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, labeled the IOER payments a “massive transfer of wealth from the Federal Reserve to private-sector banks.” Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican, called it a “subsidy.”
In a election year, Yellen was grilled on campaign issues ranging from income inequality to high rates of minority unemployment. Candidates such as Senator Bernie Sanders, a socialist from Vermont who won the New Hampshire Democratic primary Tuesday, are finding that Wall Street-bashing resonates with voters struggling with slow wage increases.
The Center for Popular Democracy, part of a coalition known as Fed Up, said it met with Waters in September and discussed why paying banks interest on excess reserves is troublesome.
‘Anti-Consumer’
“It was a tool that was given to the Fed without ever envisioning an environment of multi-trillion dollar excess reserves,” said Jordan Haedtler, campaign manager for the group. “It’s a pretty crude, anti-consumer tool that rewards big banks.”
Yellen defended the tool, noting that the flip side of the excess reserves are the Fed’s large asset holdings, which generated many more billions of dollars in remittances to the Treasury. She also warned that extinguishing reserves through asset sales could cause more volatility in financial markets and hurt growth.
“The Federal Reserve has transferred, since 2008 through 2015, roughly $615 billion back to Congress, to the taxpayers, to the Treasury, funds that have contributed importantly to financing the government,” Yellen said.
The Fed created hundreds of billions of excess reserves in the financial crisis as it began to rescue financial institutions such as Bear Stearns Cos. and conduct quantitative easing through direct bond purchases.
Normally, banks would try to dump some of the $2.3 trillion in excess reserves they now hold into overnight lending markets to try earning a return. That would swamp attempts by the Fed to control the federal funds rate and make raising rates difficult.
Bullard’s Warning
By paying a rate above its target rate for federal funds, the Fed can keep those funds out of the market and exert more control over its policy rate. To mop up other excess cash coming from sources other than commercial banks, the Fed uses another tool called reverse repurchase agreements where it uses securities as collateral for short-term loans of cash, thus removing it from the money markets.
The political liability of paying large sums of interest to private banks hasn’t been lost on Fed officials. St. Louis Fed President James Bullard said in August that the strategy would benefit from bipartisan support.
“It’s going to mean fairly large payments to the largest banks in the U.S. and to some foreign banks,” Bullard said in an August interview with Wharton Business Radio’s ”Behind the Markets” program on Sirius XM Radio. “If Congress is not comfortable with that, they should definitely tell us right now.”
Addressing Yellen during the hearing, Waters said, "It looks like we’re about to have some bipartisan concern on this issue."
The Fed chief responded, "I hear that."
Denver Receives $5 Million Challenge Grant To Promote Naturalization In The United States.
Denver Receives $5 Million Challenge Grant To Promote Naturalization In The United States.
The “America is Home” Initiative will be administered by the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNA). Cities for...
The “America is Home” Initiative will be administered by the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNA). Cities for Citizenship is co-chaired by Mayors Garcetti, Mayor Emanuel, and Mayor de Blasio of New York City. The Center for Popular Democracy is a member of the C4C Executive Committee, and Citi Community Development is the founding Corporate Partner. The C4C “America is Home” Initiative is offered in cooperation with the New Americans Campaign (NAC). NPNA and NAC are two leaders in the U.S. promoting naturalization and are well positioned to bring naturalization to scale and expand to new cities.
Read the full article here.
Paid Sick Days Advocates Applaud De Blasio & Mark-Viverito On Expansion Of Earned Sick Time
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JANUARY 17, 2014 CONTACTS: See below NEW YORK – Today, Mayor Bill de Blasio and newly...
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JANUARY 17, 2014
CONTACTS: See below
NEW YORK – Today, Mayor Bill de Blasio and newly elevated City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito jointly announced their intention to expand the Earned Sick Time law passed last year with support from the NY Paid Sick Days Coalition.
Specifically, their proposal will close the following loopholes in the Earned Sick Time Act:
Employers with 5-14 workers must now provide paid sick days to their workers. Employers with 15-19 workers must provide paid sick days immediately rather than waiting until 2015. Workers may now use their earned sick time to care for a sibling, grandchild or grandparent. Certain manufacturing employees previously left out will now be covered by the law. City agencies will now be able to proactively enforce the law rather than relying solely on worker complaints.The NY Paid Sick Days coalition includes over ninety organizational members, representing labor unions, public health organizations, educators and children’s advocates, women’s groups, economic justice groups, civil rights leaders, faith leaders, business owners and associations, research organizations, senior advocates, and immigrants’ rights groups.
QUOTES FROM COALITION MEMBERS
Center for Popular Democracy:
The following quote can be attributed to Amy Carroll, deputy director of the Center for Popular Democracy:
“We applaud Mayor de Blasio and Speaker Mark-Viverito for championing and expanding the Earned Sick Time Act. It signals a new day for New York workers and their families that their needs will come first in this administration. We look forward to working with the administration and the council to create policy that will close the income gap and create a more affordable, inclusive city for everyone.” 32BJ SEIU:
The following quote can be attributed to Hector Figueroa, president of 32BJ Service Employees International Union:
“We applaud Mayor de Blasio and Speaker Mark-Viverito for making good on their campaign promises to expand the Paid Sick Act. Although our members can afford to get sick, many of their family members and their neighbors have been forced to choose between their health and their livelihoods. This bill is an important first step in the fight for real income equality in this city and we look forward to working with the administration to make sure this bill and others aimed at improving the quality of life for New York’s working families become law.”
A Better Balance:
The following quote can be attributed to Sherry Leiwant, co-president of A Better Balance:
“A Better Balance is thrilled that the Mayor is expanding the Earned Sick Time Act we helped negotiate last year to provide paid sick days to so many of the workers excluded under that law. Thank you to Mayor de Blasio and Speaker Mark-Viverito for recognizing that New Yorkers should not be forced to choose between their jobs and their own or their family's health."
Community Service Society:
The following quote can be attributed to David R. Jones, president and CEO of the Community Service Society:
"Amending the paid sick leave law to cover more of New York City's smaller businesses is critical because employees of these businesses are the ones who most often now lack access to even one paid sick day. Our latest Unheard Third data shows that the original law effectively leaves out more than a third of the workers now without a single paid sick day -- and just gives them job protection in the form of unpaid leave. CSS applauds the mayor and speaker for their efforts to create a more stable and healthier workforce while ensuring that more low-wage workers receive a basic labor standard that most higher-income earners take for granted."
Make the Road New York:
Leonardo Fernando, member of Make the Road New York, is an immigrant worker originally from Mexico. He works at a car wash in Queens and he said: "I have lived and worked in this country for nine years, and I've never had paid sick days. The business where I work now, Fresh Pond Car Wash, would be covered under this new paid sick days law because it has thirteen employees. We work long shifts, in the heat and the cold, and we use hazardous chemicals. But I never take a day off, even when I'm sick, because I have four children to support and I can't afford to miss a day's pay or risk losing my job. I've gone to work with a fever and with the flu, and I'm so happy that I'll be able to take the day off when I'm too sick to work. I would like to thank Mayor Bill de Blasio and the New York City Council for expanding the paid sick days law and making this one of the new administration's first priorities."
New York City Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO:
The following quote is attributable to Vincent Alvarez, President of the New York City Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO: "A healthy workforce is a more dedicated and focused workforce. I applaud Mayor de Blasio and Speaker Mark-Vivierito for taking this step in the right direction toward expanding the historic Earned Sick Time law that was passed last year, and making it a real priority to improve conditions for hundreds of thousands of our city's workers. The New York City labor movement is committed to continuing to work with the Mayor and the Speaker to ensure that our city's workers are treated with the dignity and respect they deserve. "
New York Paid Leave Coalition:
The following quote can be attributed to Martha Baker, New York Paid Leave Coalition:
“The NYC Paid Sick Days Coalition applauds Mayor de Blasio for proposing amendments to the recently passed Earned Sick Time Act that will provide paid sick days on April 1, 2014 to hundreds of thousands of workers not covered by the original bill. We are delighted that the bill has been expanded and that the Mayor recognizes how important it is that New York City workers have access to paid sick days.”
Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York:
The following quote can be attributed to Daisy Chung, executive director of the Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York:
"We are pleased that Mayor de Blasio and Speaker Mark-Viverito are moving quickly to give more workers the right to paid sick days. With these changes, many restaurant workers who work in the city's smaller restaurants will now have the right to paid sick days. We look forward to working with the Mayor and Speaker to strengthen the Earned Sick Time Act even further so it can be used as a model for the rest of the country."
Working Families Party:
The following quote can be attributed to Dan Cantor, executive director of the Working Families Party:
"This is the first sign of what the new administration could mean for New York. Mayor de Blasio has done what every sensible New Yorker knows he should, and he didn't waste any time. The expansion of paid sick days delivers on a basic tenet of fairness -- that no one should face a choice between their families, their jobs, or their health."
CONTACTS:
Meredith Kolodner, 32BJ SEIU: 917-881-3896
Sherry Leiwant, A Better Balance, 917-535-0075
TJ Helmstetter, Center for Popular Democracy: 973-464-9224
Jeff Maclin, Community Service Society: 212-614-5538
Hilary Klein, Make the Road New York: 347-423-8277
Cara Noel, NY Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO: 212.604.9552
Martha Baker, NY Paid Leave Coalition: 917-992-5300
Rahul Saksena, Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York: 203-561-2959
Khan Shoieb, Working Families Party: 347-596-6389
Clinton offers fresh support for key progressive priorities
Over the course of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton hasn’t had a whole lot to say...
Over the course of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton hasn’t had a whole lot to say about the Federal Reserve or monetary policy in general, which is why it was all the more interesting to see the Democratic frontrunner’s campaign yesterday endorse a change long sought by progressive activists. The Washington Post reported:
The Fed is led by a seven-member board of governors based in Washington and a dozen regional bank presidents based across the country, from New York to Kansas City to San Francisco. The governors are nominated by the White House and approved by the Senate, but regional bank presidents are selected by their boards of directors, whose occupants are chosen by the banking industry and by the Fed governors in Washington.
In a statement to The Washington Post, Clinton’s campaign said she supports removing bankers from the boards of directors and increasing diversity within the Fed.
In a written statement, a campaign spokesperson told the Post, “The Federal Reserve is a vital institution for our economy and the well-being of our middle class, and the American people should have no doubt that the Fed is serving the public interest. That’s why Secretary Clinton believes that the Fed needs to be more representative of America as a whole and that commonsense reforms – like getting bankers off the boards of regional Federal Reserve banks – are long overdue.”
This brings Clinton in line with Bernie Sanders, who endorsed this policy late last year, saying he wants a system in which “the foxes would no longer guard the henhouse.”
The statement also came the same day Clinton wrote an op-ed for the Washington Informer, an African-American newspaper, vowing to be a “vocal champion” for D.C. statehood.
“In the case of our nation’s capital, we have an entire populace that is routinely denied a voice in its own democracy,” Clinton wrote, adding, “Washingtonians serve in the military, serve on juries, and pay taxes just like everyone else. And yet, they don’t even have a vote in Congress.”
Earlier this week, Clinton also emphasized her support for a “public option” in health care coverage, including a possible Medicare buy-in policy.
The broader pattern matters, and it’s not altogether expected.
When Clinton’s campaign got underway nearly a year ago, the former Secretary of State started laying out her platform, and on a variety of issues – immigration, criminal-justice reform, expanding voting rights, etc. – the Democrat not only endorsed progressive ideas, she endorsed an agenda that was even more ambitious and further to the left than many expected.
At the time, of course, the question that loomed over the race dealt with motivation: was Clinton throwing her support behind a series of bold proposals because she was worried about Bernie Sanders, or was she serious about these plans? It’s one thing to make appeals to the left as the Democratic race gets underway, but would Clinton follow through when she shifts her attention to the general election?
The answer to these questions is coming into sharper focus. While the Democratic race still has some primaries to go, the delegate math suggests Clinton is well positioned to prevail, and she’s already begun shifting her attention to Donald Trump and the fall election. If the cynics were correct, this would be about the time we’d expect to see Clinton move gradually towards the center, eschewing some of her more progressive goals.
Except this week, we’re seeing the opposite, with Clinton backing Sanders-endorsed changes to the financial industry and touting her support for a public option.
Maybe Clinton is hoping to win over Sanders’ ardent fans who aren’t yet ready to back her candidacy in the fall. Maybe she believes these progressive goals are popular enough with the American mainstream that she’s not really taking much of a risk. Maybe she actually believes what she’s saying and none of this is calculated in any meaningful way.
Whatever the motivation, Clinton may be focusing her attention on the general election, but many of her key progressive ideals, at least for now, remain very much intact.
By Steve Benen
Source
The search process for a new president of the New York Fed was seriously shady
The search process for a new president of the New York Fed was seriously shady
The New York Fed search was unusual for the public scrutiny it garnered, thanks in no small part to activists led by...
The New York Fed search was unusual for the public scrutiny it garnered, thanks in no small part to activists led by Fed Up and the Center for Popular Democracy. The two groups called on the regional bank, whose presidents have all been white men, to broaden its search and make the selection criteria more transparent.
Read the full article here.
Janet Yellen’s Future at the Fed Unresolved Heading Into Jackson Hole
Janet Yellen’s Future at the Fed Unresolved Heading Into Jackson Hole
The prospect of a second term for Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen won't be on the agenda at the central bank's...
The prospect of a second term for Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen won't be on the agenda at the central bank's annual retreat this week at Grand Teton National Park, but the question of whether she could be asked to stay on -- and whether she would accept -- will be hanging over the confab.
Read the full article here.
Higher rates hurt working families: Opposing view
We should not mince words: Raising interest rates is meant to intentionally slow down the economy. With low-wage...
We should not mince words: Raising interest rates is meant to intentionally slow down the economy. With low-wage earners still underemployed, wages stagnant, and black families still mired in a Great Recession of our own, the economy is simply not ready for the Federal Reserve to slow it down by raising rates. So why the hurry?
By all accounts, supporters of higher interest rates are not following the data. While the unemployment levels are generally inching down, there is pain in other key economic indicators: Wages remain low, and there are pockets of high unemployment and racial inequality. Underemployment is still very high, and there are many more job seekers than job openings. In short, the labor market is still slack, with no risk that rising wages will drive up inflation.
As Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz recently wrote, the evidence “indicates that the predictable costs of premature tightening — slower job and wage growth — far outweigh the risk of accelerating inflation.”
Roughly one in five African-American workers and one in six Hispanic workers are unemployed or underemployed. Similarly, about one in six workers with only a high school degree are unemployed or underemployed. These workers have little chance of seeing wage gains if the Fed slows the pace of job creation.
According to the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure, inflation is running under 1.1%, significantly below the Fed’s already-low target of 2%. Inflation has been below 2% for most of the past six years. And Fed staff — as well as financial markets — expect inflation to remain below 2% over the next few years.
The data simply do not add up to a legitimate case for raising rates. The Fed is under enormous pressure to raise rates from Wall Street banks and conservative voices within the institution. But yielding to that pressure would damage the lives and livelihoods of the vast majority of America’s working families. In the absence of any real threat of harmful inflation, there is simply no reason to slow down the economy and submit those families to more hardship.
Connie M. Razza is the director of strategic research at the Center for Popular Democracy.
Source: USA Today
Arizona protesters arrested at Flake’s D.C. office in health care rally
Arizona protesters arrested at Flake’s D.C. office in health care rally
WASHINGTON — As calls of “Trumpcare kills” and “health care is a human right” echoed through the halls of Capitol...
WASHINGTON — As calls of “Trumpcare kills” and “health care is a human right” echoed through the halls of Capitol office buildings Monday, Lauren Klinkhamer stood quietly in Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake’s office and told staffers, “I don’t want to die.”
The Tucson resident fears she would be among the 22 million Americans, and as many as 400,000 Arizonans, who would lose health care under a bill the Senate is considering to replace the Affordable Care Act. For Klinkhamer, who said she suffers from 16 chronic conditions, losing her coverage would be a death sentence.
Read the full article here.
Nine Months After Hurricane Maria, Congress Isn't Doing Much to Help
If a commission discovered “any wrongdoing, any corruption, any malice in that corruption,” added Julio Lopez Varona of...
If a commission discovered “any wrongdoing, any corruption, any malice in that corruption,” added Julio Lopez Varona of the Center for Popular Democracy’s Puerto Rico programs, “then people should go to jail.” In his view that includes not just federal officials but local Puerto Rican officials, some of whom have come under fire for mismanaging the disaster and recovery. But Mark-Viverito notes that it is far too early to think about how to enact punishments on individuals.
2 months ago
2 months ago