Politico has a remark on why non-economist Herman Cain may have been put in the pipeline to be nominated to the Fed Reserve Board by President Trump:
Some GOP senators said that Cain’s difficult path might have eased Stephen Moore’s confirmation to the Fed, despite Moore’s own problems with unpaid taxes and his partisan reputation. After all, Republicans might be hard-pressed to revolt against both of Trump’s nominees.
Fed Reserve Board nominee and non-economist Stephen Moore has also been a startling announced to-be-nominee. Steve Benen provides a summary:
To say it’s difficult to know where to start with Moore’s c.v. is to be quite literal. It matters, obviously, that he’s not an economist and knows very little about what the Federal Reserve does. But it also matters that Moore has been wrong about practically everything for many years. It matters that he appears to be a Trump sycophant. It matters that Moore has had a hand in some spectacular economic failures. It matters that Moore’s economic opinions tend to echo Republican talking points while “flying in the face of economic theory.”
It matters that Moore has a reputation for misstating basic factual details. It matters that his economic views tend to vary based on the party of the president at the time. It matters that the White House has made the finance industry nervous with this nomination. It matters that actual economists have been apoplectic about Trump’s selection of Moore, (One scholar argued, “This is truly an appalling appointment. An ideologue, charlatan, and hack. Frankly so bad the putatively serious economists in Trump administration should resign as matter of honor.”)
And Jon Chait at New York Magazine:
Faced with the prospect of attempting to confirm two absurdly unqualified cranks for esteemed Fed positions, the conservative movement has undertaken a triage operation, focusing its defenses on Moore and leaving Cain to twist in the wind. The decision to save Moore at Cain’s expense makes some sense: Of the two, Cain’s kookery was on more colorful display through his slapstick 2012 presidential campaign. Cain’s treatment of women (numerous sexual-harassment lawsuits) is harder to defend than Moore’s(open adultery followed by failure to pay child support.)
Still, the defenses of Moore have a distinctly weary undertone. The Wall Street Journal endorses its former staffer, gamely notes that “as an individual Fed governor, Mr. Moore wouldn’t likely wield much influence.” Yes, “the alleged rap” on him is that “he has on occasion been wrong about monetary policy,” the editorial allows with considerable understatement.
Damned with exceedingly faint praise by WSJ, I’d say. Someone who subscribes to the WSJ should call them up and tell them to grow a pair, because this is a President who needs to be reprimanded, and hard enough to break fingers.
In the meanwhile, I hope that the Congressional press corps gets together and decides to ask every Senator who says they like Moore in comparison to Cain whether or not they enjoy being gamed by the most incompetent President in the history of the Nation. Which is to say, made to look like fools.
And, finally, what is going on here? Trump’s other nominee to the board is now the chairman, and he’s worked out quite well in my opinion. Has Trump received orders to try to wreck the economy from his handlers? Or does he think he can goose the economy into such a high gear that enough voters who otherwise despise him will vote for him after all? Moore apparently thinks so. But he’s only a single vote.
Perhaps it’s the continuing drain of ‘adults’ from this Administration…
