So why do lawmaker feel emboldened to attack Yellen more agressively than her predecessors? Political climate or something about her?
— Victoria McGrane (@vgmac) February 25, 2015
It’s hard to tell genuine economic malfeasance from the GOP’s general non-stop conserva-yammer, but this seems… significant? From the NYTimes, “House Republicans Intensify Attacks on Federal Reserve“:
The relationship between Congress and the Federal Reserve took a turn for the worse on Wednesday.
During a testy three-hour hearing, Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee accused Janet L. Yellen, chairwoman of the Fed, of using her office to advance liberal policy goals and argued that Congress should increase its oversight of the central bank.
Republicans, who control Congress but not the agencies that interpret and execute legislation, appear frustrated with the course of economic policy. They want the Fed to move more quickly toward raising interest rates and to ease some of the restrictions that a Congress controlled by Democrats imposed on the financial industry after its 2008 collapse.
“Fed reforms are needed, and I, for one, believe Fed reforms are coming,” said Representative Jeb Hensarling, the Texas Republican who is chairman of the committee.
Ms. Yellen pushed back forcefully, sometimes speaking over her questioners to make a point. She defended her actions and the conduct of monetary policy, and she warned against constraining the Fed’s independence…
Republicans expressed particular anger about a speech on rising economic inequality that Ms. Yellen delivered in October, a few weeks before the midterm elections, in which she questioned “whether this trend is compatible with values rooted in our nation’s history.”
Representative Mick Mulvaney, a South Carolina Republican, criticized Ms. Yellen for speaking about “issues outside your jurisdiction,” which he said undermined the Fed’s political independence.
“You’re sticking your nose in places that you have no business to be,” Mr. Mulvaney said.
Ms. Yellen, visibly unsettled, responded that she considered the issue important, that all of her predecessors as Fed chairman had from time to time used that pulpit to address broader economic issues, and that “I feel that I am entitled to do the same.”…
When Mr. Duffy, his voice rising, said that Ms. Yellen in the speech had appeared to advocate the kinds of policy solutions generally favored by Democrats, Ms. Yellen snapped, “I didn’t offer any policy recommendations whatsoever in that speech.”
Republicans also criticized Ms. Yellen for what they described as frequent meetings with Obama administration officials…
Good for Ms. Yellen that she pushed back, hard. And now I’m looking forward to see what happens Friday afternoon. Per Dave Weigel, at Bloomberg Politics:
Two months ago, after learning that Fed Chair Janet Yellen had met with progressives, a group of conservatives started demanding a sit-down of their own. “The left has met with Janet Yellen in an effort to influence monetary policy,” thundered Steve Lonegan, a two-time candidate for governor of New Jersey (and one-time candidate for Senate, and for Congress), who now directs monetary policy at American Principles in Action. “Conservatives cannot sit back and allow liberals to have sole voice with the Federal Reserve System.”
After some backroom wrangling, the conservatives got their meeting. It will occur at the end of a week of Yellen testimony in Congress, while scores of conservative leaders are gathered at CPAC, a drive down the road from Washington. “Conservatives finally get a meeting with Yellen, and it happens at 3 p.m. on a Friday,” snarked American Commitment President Phil Kerpen, while waiting between events at CPAC….
The list of attendees is larded with the sort of econo-nihilists (Heritage, Cato, Grover Norquist’s National Taxpayers Union, Citizens for Limited Government) who don’t believe the Federal Reserve should even exist, so I hope Yellen will treat them just as generously as they deserve.
someguy
Good to see we’re in favor of avoiding the imposing of regulatory accountability and congressional oversight on the banking comunity Masters of the Universe who control the banking and Federal Reserve system.
Support your local shadowy international banker, and keep her independent!
Elizabelle
I hope Ms. Yellen has a secret stash of Tums or headache remedy to put up with her Friday meeting.
Brave woman.
MattF
Iti’s those Y chromosomes, they bestow economic wisdom.
That said, one may note that Yellen’s predecessor, Bernanke, was a Republican. But since he was also a competent economist and a renowned expert on exactly the sort of thing that happened to the US economy in 2008, he braved the winger headwinds and did the right things, more or less. Yellen is following in his footsteps but being both a Democrat and a female makes her a bigger target for the economic know-nothings.
Frankensteinbeck
If this article is correct, she will be very polite about ignoring them.
feebog
Wait, I’m confused, isn’t it ladyparts they always want to regulate?
Belafon
Here’s the choice for Democrats in 2016: If we elect a woman to the White House, expect her to get as much done as Obama. Do we want to try to get progressive reforms through, or do we want to show the world the misogynists in the Republican party. Personally, I think we have to fight the misogynists first.
Elizabelle
No sympathies for the Sheriff Macks a few threads down, but I’d contribute to GoFundMe to buy Ms. Yellen a bracing martini or a superb glass of wine (or two) after her meeting with the pinheads.
humanoid.panda
To be fair to the GOP no one threatened to lynch Yellen yet, like they did Bernanke, so I dunno what all the libtards are complaining about.
Betty Cracker
@Belafon: Obama actually got quite a bit done, so that sounds like a bargain to me. But if Congress remains in GOP hands after 2016 (which it probably will), I’m not sure a white male Democrat would fare much better. The opposition would be expressed with less sexism, obviously, but it would likely be just as pervasive.
kindness
Now if only Yellen’s meeting with wingnuts could be streamed live. I would have to order in a new load of popcorn to cover it.
@humanoid.panda: Oh looky. A new troll!! How sweet.
humanoid.panda
Given the GOP hold on the House, if Clinton or anyone else is able to accomplish even one third of what Obama accomplished, we will be incredibly lucky. I don’t see how appointing a man or a woman or a potted plant would make any difference in that regard.
humanoid.panda
@Betty Cracker: Yep. Clinton I was While and male and Southern, and (I think) evangelical, and centrist and all he got from the GOP was a bag of dicks..
humanoid.panda
@kindness: Sarcasm fail.
humanoid.panda
@humanoid.panda: I was referring to Rick Perry’s infamous threat to treat Bernanke “not so nice” if he shows up in Texas, in case this is not a sarcasm fail ,but obscure reference fail.
Xantar
@Belafon:
So if we elect a woman to the White House, she’ll overhaul health care, create the greatest new program to transfer from the wealthy to the poor, overhaul the clean energy industry, keep us out of stupid ground wars in Asia, expand LGBT rights in unprecedented ways, appoint two Supreme Court justices, create a sustained period of economic growth, and do it all without major scandals?
Am I supposed to see a problem with this?
someguy
@MattF: Yeah, of course. It’s a war on women thing and partisan. Here I was thinking they opposed her because Republicans are crazy anti-semitic Randian gold bugs who think the international banking system is run by jews.
Occam’s Razor. She has a uterus. That’s why they hate her.
dmsilev
@Xantar: But other than that, what have
the Romansthe Obama administration ever done for us?gogol's wife
@Xantar:
Co-sign.
Belafon
@Xantar: And the part that required legislation in the first two years. I hope the next Democrat pulls off half of what he’s accomplished.
My point was the fight we’ll be having over the femaleness of the next female president. It will consume a lot of time and drive a lot of people who don’t think a woman should be president to vote, while not motivating our side afterwards. I would love for our side to finally learn that lesson, but I also think we need to have that fight.
@Betty Cracker: You’re correct that Clinton didn’t avoid the attacks, and I agree that the racism is just one weapon, but it is a weapon that they couldn’t use against Clinton. What it does is distract, and allows things like the takeover of so many local governments by racists.
Xantar
@dmsilev:
Brought peace?
Also gave us beer.
Xantar
@Belafon:
Let me get this straight: you think that if we have a female president and the Republican party lets their misogynistic freak flag fly, this will not inspire female voters to come out to support her?
GregB
Hopefully Chris Christie will tell Janet Yellin to sit down and shut up!
That’s leadership.
Elizabelle
@humanoid.panda: Hi panda. Glad you’re here. I don’t see a troll.
Mnemosyne (iPad Mini)
@someguy:
Both/and, not either/or. They hate her for both her politics and her gender. If she were a conservative, they would merely be condescending to the little lady.
Suzanne
The sexism will be equal in severity to the racism Obama’s experienced, should HRC win the presidency.
I’m getting ready to iron shirts right now. And make dinner.
Betty Cracker
@Xantar: It may be premature to celebrate peace in our time just yet, but beer, hell yeah! A White House ale clone is on my to-brew list.
NonyNony
@Belafon:
I’m gonna disagree here. The next Democratic president could be a white male from Alabama and he would be just as illegitimate as any other Democrat to them at this point. Some other excuse WILL be found and trivial minutia will be pounded into the table.
Frankly it’s probably better to have it be something so obviously stupid as “look she’s a woman with ladyparts!” as their objection to the next Democratic president. If the next one is a white male, they’ll go into his background and start finding actual objectionable crap that democrats won’t be able to defend (see Clinton, Bill).
Belafon
@Belafon: I’m hoping it does. As a white person, I’m beginning to believe that the apathy of whites will override a whole lot of other considerations.
Belafon
@Belafon: Let me also restate that, whatever happens, I do believe we need to have the Republican views on women out in the open and we will have to deal with that if it happens to a female president. My point in the above is that we all have been tired at times of “Republican racism, again” but we have to deal with it.
Belafon
@Xantar: My 28 was meant to be a reply to you. I for some reason no longer have edit abilities.
humanoid.panda
@Mnemosyne (iPad Mini): But again, Bernanke was a republican, and they charged him with treason!
The Moar You Know
@Xantar: Know this isn’t addressed to me but the short answer is no, it won’t.
Republican women are going to vote Republican no matter how awful the party is towards their gender. The last 20 years is proof of that.
kc
Well, she is a White Feminist.
Villago Delenda Est
@NonyNony: You are correct. Any Democrat elected to the Presidency is an usurper of the sainted crown of Ronaldus Magnus, shitty grade Z movie star, as far as the cretinous scum that are the Rethuglicans are concerned.
Linnaeus
The guy at the end (Rep. Sean Duffy) was a real dick. Even used the old “Democrat Party” trope.
boatboy_srq
@NonyNony: The only thing that a white male Democratic President would buy us is a brief interval while the Reichwing gropes for the next despicable weapon to use. That interval, though, might be enough to get a good deal accomplished. Recall that Obama had Blackness in full view, which made the “one term President” push easier; Clinton has just as obvious Femaleness, which can be attacked immediately as well. White and Male (and presumably Happily Married and Procreating, plus Auditable and Clean[ish] Record) means the Teahad will need to find something else to use: they WILL find something, but it will take a little time and a lot of background research, and that’s time Dems can use.
gratuitous
Weird, isn’t it? Republicans win an election, and it’s all about the “will of the people” and their mandate to do whatever the hell they want, whether they ran on a particular issue or not. When Republicans lose an election, it’s somehow the height of arrogance for the winner (in this case, the president) to carry out the functions of his office in a way that aligns with his own party’s interests.
Keep pushing back, Ms. Yellin. You’re there because you deserve to be there, and the political Lilliputians seeking to undermine your work should be slapped back down when they can’t be ignored.
Villago Delenda Est
@gratuitous: Any time a Democrat is elected, to any office, obviously voter fraud was involved.
The entire “True the Vote” movement is based on this idea…that there is no legitimate election, ever, unless the Rethuglican wins.
They have gone around the bend. The GOP didn’t used to be like this, but in 1992 Clinton beat Bush senior, and all hell broke loose. Now there is no way any Democrat, anywhere, was elected with out busloads of “illegal” immigrants being brought in to stuff ballot boxes for the Democrat.
Betty Cracker
@The Moar You Know: I think you’re right that Republican women will vote for whatever shithook the GOP primary process horks up, but misogyny may shake loose some moderate or lightly affiliated Republicans, if such creatures still exist. Even if the 2016 campaign isn’t a sexism festival, I think a woman at the top of the ticket would drive female participation through the roof. It will be a big fucking deal. I’m not behind a Hillary Clinton run, but that would certainly be a big advantage to it, in my view.
Roger Moore
@Belafon:
Another President who gets as much done as Obama sounds like a pretty big win. For all the whining about Obama not accomplishing anything, he’s actually pushed the liberal/progressive agenda more than any president since LBJ. I’ll take another 8 years of that in a heartbeat.
Paul in KY
@Villago Delenda Est: You know, he could act better than I thought. Played genial, aw-shucks politician role pretty well.
boatboy_srq
@Villago Delenda Est: Continuing proof (assuming any was ever needed) that to the Reichwing, giving Those People one whole vote per person to cast by themselves for themselves according to their own consciences was a bad idea and should be immediately and permanently reversed. Southern “Voter Fraud” shouters are nothing more than would-be slavery apologists who still think Massah should have his own full vote plus all 3/5 votes his
propertystaff entitles him to.Seanly
Conservative economic policy sucks donkey balls. I hope she is gracious and forthright with them that their ideas are idiotic and don’t work.
gocart mozart
When will the bankers and bond traders get equal time to influence monetary policy? Next, the neocons will dominate our foreign policy discussions, Bill O’Reilly will start acting like an ass and then cats will start laying about the house instead of making themselves useful. What then?
Bystander
While I agree that, if elected, HRC will face a barrage of sexist dog whistles that rivals the racist twaddle lobbed routinely at President Obama, I heard something from CPAC today. Jimmy Carter was jokingly referred to as a national calamity on a par with the Depression by “The Sage of Ni66erhead” Rick Perry.
A native Georgian with a distinguished military career, an intellect, and a life devoted to acting on his Christian principles. Vilified and mocked by these jabbering dunderheads. There is no good person on Earth they will ever choose not to denigrate. They are definitionally evil.
Sherparick
@someguy: Well, it is at least one more reason to hate her. Although not quite as rude, the Neo-Confederates were pretty harsh toward Ben Bernanke because he failed to keep the economy in a depression so they could replace that Black Muslim Kenya Usurper in the White House with the White’s Man in America (Mitch Romney). http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2013/02/27/ben-bernanke-to-house-republicans-qe-helps-average-americans-not-wall-street/
It should be noted as these guys go on about “debasement of the currency” etc., The U.S. actually entered deflation regarding CPI since December, with -0.7% annual rate in January 2015. http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-is-experiencing-the-good-kind-of-deflation-2015-2. Some of this is transitory with oil and gas prices, but prices and downward pressure on prices (and wages) is coming from the strengthening of the dollar. Like Joe Kernan of CNBC Squawk Box, the Republicans find good economic times under a Democratic President “depressing” since these “left wing,” redistribution policies (Affordable Care Act, Dodd-Frank, and slightly higher taxes on rich people and capital gains) are suppose to destroy the economy, and when the economy does not act destroyed, they get a big “Sad.”
boatboy_srq
@Bystander: In truth, he didn’t appear so successful at the time. There were a lot of distractions, and he p!ssed off the Beltway VSPs by bringing in his own team from outside (some of whom did better than others). Stagflation and the Iran crisis of ’79-80 didn’t help, either. But that was the vision from ’77 to the late 80s, and he’s looked far better since – except to people who think Nixon was railroaded, that the US should have repealed the 22nd Amendment to give Saint Ronnie his 3rd and 4th terms, that BJs in the Oval Office are worse than manufactured evidence for invasions and economic crashes from underregulation, and that anything BHO does is unPatriotic unGodly, and unExceptionally unAhmurrcan just because TABMITWH.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@someguy:
I am sure the stewardship of the “drown the goverments in the bathtub” crowd will work well
are you even vaguely aware that the objection of these conservatives is that there even the pretense of some kind of banking regulatory body?
Eric
1. She’s a woman
2. She wasn’t originally appointed by Bush.
Any other questions, Victoria?