Read on Twitter
One quick anecdote underscoring this brilliant editorial from @steelewheelz in @thehill on the Fed's blindspots in ensuring equitable and broad-based growth. (1/6) https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/499656-rethinking-the-fed
To this spot-on point: "The leaders of a public institution that holds itself out as apolitical make political choices all the time: They just cloak them in neutral, market-friendly language." (2/6)
The Fed hosts Congressional staff once a year to learn about the central bank & ask questions of staff. In 2012, I went & asked the General Counsel about a GAO report, & why labor & consumer representation on regional Fed bank boards was so paltry (3/6) https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-18
The GC said, "it's because labor & consumer groups tend to be so political & that is disqualifying."
This was at the same time that Jamie Dimon was on the Board of the NY Fed while also lobbying on Dodd-Frank implementation issues & embroiled in the London Whale scandal. (4/6)
This was at the same time that Jamie Dimon was on the Board of the NY Fed while also lobbying on Dodd-Frank implementation issues & embroiled in the London Whale scandal. (4/6)
Anyway, the perception that labor & consumer groups are inherently political but bankers with many lobbying interests before the Board are not: that's what @steelewheelz is getting at in his piece. (5/6)
Progress has been made on Board representation issues thanks to advocacy by folks like @Fed_Up_Campaign, directed at the time by @AdyBarkan. But a bigger shift needs to happen if we want the Fed to equitably serve our economy. (6/6)
