ShareThis Page
Stephen Moore, Trump ally, withdraws from contention for Fed seat | TribLIVE.com
Politics Election

Stephen Moore, Trump ally, withdraws from contention for Fed seat

1106857_web1_fed-moore-bg-58e7bfb8-50cf-11e9-88a1-ed346f0ec94f
Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg News
Stephen Moore

WASHINGTON — President Trump was dealt another setback in his bid to put a political ally on the Federal Reserve Board as plans to appoint Stephen Moore, a conservative commentator and economist, collapsed amid a backlash sparked by Moore’s past writings and statements that disparaged women and gender equity.

Trump said in a tweet Thursday that Moore “has decided to withdraw from the Fed process.” It came just hours after Moore insisted publicly that he was not dropping out.

The president didn’t explain why Moore withdrew, but this week several Republican senators voiced doubts about his ability to win enough votes for confirmation.

In a letter to Trump, Moore, 59, said: “The unrelenting attacks on my character have become untenable for me and my family, and three more months of this would be too hard on us.”

Moore is the second prospective Trump nominee to the Fed board to withdraw in recent weeks.

In April, Herman Cain, the restaurant executive and 2012 GOP presidential candidate, bowed out amid renewed concerns about previous allegations of sexual misconduct, which he has denied, and worries that his partisan support for Trump could undermine the independence of the Fed. Cain is chair of a political action committee called America Fighting Back, which seeks to fight negative media coverage of Trump.

Moore was a senior adviser on Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. He has been a sharp critic of the Fed, calling its interest rate increases “malpractice” and insisting that policymakers reverse course by lowering rates — something Trump himself has repeatedly pressured the Fed to do.

Neither Moore nor Cain was formally nominated by Trump. The president took the unusual step of publicizing his plan to forward their names to the Senate before they were fully vetted.

The Trump administration offered no new names of potential nominees, but lawmakers of both parties said it would be wise for the White House to carefully screen candidates before deciding on whom to nominate.

“Everybody ought to be vetted as much as they could before they are seriously nominated because they will be vetted later,” Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., a senior member of the Banking Committee, told Politico.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., tweeted that Trump must now nominate “two serious candidates.”

Chris Rupkey, managing director and chief economist at MUFG Union Bank in New York, said it may be hard for Trump to find a candidate who meets his demands.

“Maybe (there’s) an academic with a conservative bent who might support the president’s economic policies and jawboning for lower interest rates,” Rupkey said. “It’s going to be a tough bill to fill.”

There are two open seats on the seven-member board of the Fed, which plays a crucial role in steering the economy largely by setting targets on key interest rates. Trump’s selection of Moore and Cain was seen by many as an attempt to install yes-men to the central bank ahead of next year’s election.

Moore has been an unabashed Trump loyalist, and some economists argued that he lacked the qualifications for the Fed position. Moore’s economic ideas have come under attack for being malleable and politically motivated, for instance stating that President Obama’s stimulus policies would trigger hyperinflation. And he has been criticized for flip-flopping. Previously, Moore called on the Fed to raise interest rates.

Moore’s personal reputation took a hit after reports, based on court records, that he had failed to pay alimony and child support, and that he had a $75,000 tax lien against him.

Even so, as the former chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, Moore was seen as having a reasonably good chance of being confirmed by the Republican-controlled Senate. That is, until the spotlight was turned on Moore’s writings on women.

In his columns, Moore complained about equal pay for equal work and denigrated women’s involvement in sports, proposing in one article that female referees be banned from college basketball tournament games.

Moore has said that he regrets writing some articles and that he doesn’t remember others, some of which were published in the early 2000s. But given the sensitivity of gender issues in the current political climate, as reflected in the #MeToo movement and the record number of women elected to Congress last year, pressure has been mounting on lawmakers to oppose his candidacy.

As late as Monday, Trump’s chief economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, had said the White House remained behind Moore, even as his articles were being reviewed.

At the same time, Moore had acknowledged that his articles on women could torpedo his nomination and said that he would drop out if he became a political liability.

Moore’s prospective appointment was all the more troubling because of his controversial views on women at a time when many have sought greater female representation at the traditionally male-dominated Fed and in professions such as economics.

“It’s not just a lack of understanding of the economy and the role of the Federal Reserve. It’s sexism and misogyny,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at accounting and advisory firm Grant Thornton. “It’s not just offensive, but it’s offensive to the economy. It discourages growth.”

The Fed’s monetary policy is made by the seven-member board and five of 12 district presidents, four of whom serve on a rotating basis. A full term for a governor on the Fed board is 14 years.

Trump already has filled four board seats, none of which were seen as particularly partisan. Trump’s appointments have included the Fed’s current chairman, Jerome H. Powell, whom Trump has frequently criticized and reportedly contemplated firing, although it isn’t clear he has the authority to do so.

Trump sought to appoint Moore and Cain as he has become increasingly frustrated with the Fed. The president has repeatedly castigated the bank for raising interest rates, saying that economic growth and stock markets would be much higher today had the Fed not done so.

Trump has kept up the attacks even though the Fed stopped lifting rates after December and the main benchmark interest rate, at less than 2.5 percent, remains low by historical levels.

On Tuesday, as Fed officials met to discuss the economy and policy measures, Trump tweeted that interest rates should be cut by 1 percentage point and urged the Fed to further support growth by undertaking an unconventional stimulus program that was used to fight the Great Recession.

Despite the president’s jawboning and hopes among some investors for a rate cut, Fed policymakers Wednesday said they would stand pat on interest rates. They noted that the economy had been growing at a solid pace and that the current level of interest rates was appropriate, although it’s possible the Fed could cut rates if inflation stayed very low for a sustained period.

It isn’t surprising that presidents would want lower interest rates to foster economic growth, but Trump’s very public and forceful criticisms of the Fed are highly unusual. Experts have warned that in his efforts to influence the Fed by placing allies on the board, Trump is threatening to politicize the institution, which could damage its independence and credibility for nonpartisan policymaking.

Categories: News | Politics Election
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.