Janet Yellen and the female dollar

Janet Yellen, courtesy of Slate.com.

Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman joins forces with Senator Elizabeth Warren in supporting Janet Yellen, vice chairwoman of the Fed’s board of governors, to head the Federal Reserve. That’s right. Neither Krugman, nor Warren, is going along with “the Female Dollar” folks out there who would likely support Larry Summers; Summers’ claim to fame includes charges of sexism while serving as president of Harvard.

In his recent NY Times op ed, Krugman identifies two sexist campaigns seeking to undermine Yellen. Krugman sets up his forceful argument on Yellen’s behalf in his opening paragraph:

Can a woman effectively run the Federal Reserve? That shouldn’t even be a question. And Janet Yellen, the vice chairwoman of the Fed’s Board of Governors, isn’t just up to the job; by any objective standard, she’s the best-qualified person in America to take over when Ben Bernanke steps down as chairman.

Let’s start with the more extreme, open campaign. Last week, The New York Sun published an editorial attacking Ms. Yellen titled “The Female Dollar.” The editorial took it for granted that the Fed has been following disastrously inflationary monetary policies for years, even though actual inflation is at a 50-year low. And it warned that things would get even worse if the dollar were to become merely “gender-backed.” I am not making this up.

True, The Sun is a marginal publication, with strong gold-bug tendencies, and nobody would pay much attention if the rest of the right had ignored or distanced itself from that editorial. In fact, however, The Wall Street Journal immediately followed up with its own editorial along the same lines, in the course of which it approvingly quoted The Sun piece, female dollar and all.

More:

Reappointment of Bernanke Fails to Upstage Breaking Economic News

As David Gergen at AC360 points out, our vacationing president reappointed Ben Bernanke today as head of the Federal Reserve in an obvious attempt to divert attention from bad news on the economic front.

Gergen writes:

Yet even the Bernanke story cannot fully deflect attention from the other economic story engulfing the administration today: its official announcement of new economic projections – in particular, its acknowledgment that deficits over the coming decade will be even higher than it said only three months ago. Now, the administration is predicting that instead of $7 trillion in new deficits, the country will rack up a staggering $9 trillion in new deficits for the 2010-2019 period. (The Congressional Budget Office has published its own numbers today that are largely parallel.)

Deficits of that magnitude would be extraordinarily dangerous and irresponsible for the country. They would double the national debt, risk much higher inflation, saddle future taxpayers with annual interest payments of over $900 billion, make us even more reliant upon China as a creditor, and over time would weaken us as a great nation. Talk about trend lines that are unsustainable!

Health care reform was already in growing trouble before this report. These deficit projections clearly add another significant threat to its passage. The administration will now have to persuade Congress and a skeptical public that it would be financially prudent to embark upon an ambitious new entitlement program in the teeth of dangerously growing deficits.

Gergen suggests a way out for the president:

In view of all this, President Obama has a choice. He can push forward with health reform efforts, giving short shrift to these deficit concerns. If so – if he continues to insist that Washington is just too “wee-weed up” — he will find that some of his strongest allies will become more reluctant on a big health reform bill this year.

Or he can come to grips with these grim forecasts and present to the nation a credible, comprehensive plan for reining in long-term deficits before Congress acts on health reform. The second path demands more courage – and is also the one of real leadership.

Bipartisan Laughter As Economy Continues to Tank

Update: For Breaking news on Geithner’s financial-sector bailout plan rolled out this morning, go here.

Well, at least it was laughter laced with sarcasm last night from lawmakers and congressional staff in response to newly appointed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s briefing on his financial-sector bailout. Geithner, you recall, was confirmed to his post after revealing his difficulties in completing his individual income tax returns.

Ryan Grim at the Huffington Post reports:

The laughter was at its height when Obama officials explained that the White House planned to guarantee a wide swath of toxic assets -- which they referred to as "legacy assets" -- but wouldn't be asking Congress for money. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), a bailout opponent in the fall, asked the officials to give Congress the total dollar figure for which they were on the hook. The officials said that they couldn't provide a number, a response met by chuckling that was bipartisan, but tilted toward the GOP side. By guaranteeing the assets, Geithner hopes he can persuade the private sector to purchase a portion of them.

Congress may be able to do little more than laugh. The Federal Reserve, in extreme situations, is allowed to intervene in the financial markets in dramatic ways. The Fed jumped into the markets long before the $700 billion bailout passed through Congress by guaranteeing toxic assets held by CitiGroup and Bank of America.

The White House still has roughly $350 billion in Congress-appropriated TARP funds to use, and the officials told the group Monday night that it planned to use $50 billion for foreclosure mitigation and further amounts to shore up bank balance sheets.

Read more: