关于当前席卷美联储的混乱局面，你只需明白一点：唐纳德·特朗普总统意图掌控这家历史上保持独立的美国中央银行。仅此而已。
尽管眼下涌现出诸多错综复杂的美联储相关叙事争相吸引公众眼球，但所有这些讨论最终都回归到一个核心事实：特朗普企图掌控该金融机构的决策权，却无法像对待其政府直接管辖的部门那样长驱直入地解雇所有人员。由于缺乏法律授权罢免美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔，特朗普转而试图通过炒作该行华盛顿总部装修费用问题制造丑闻。
如今，特朗普及其追随者——联邦住房金融局局长比尔·普尔特（Bill Pulte）正以“抵押贷款欺诈”为借口，大肆宣扬要解雇丽莎·库克（Lisa Cook）。作为美联储政策制定者之一，库克将成为特朗普权力扩张的阻碍。
简而言之：库克（Cook）是拜登提名的美联储理事，于2022年获得两党支持后确认任命，她是美联储理事会七位核心决策者之一。如果特朗普能用一个更顺从自己意愿的人取代她，他很快就能在理事会中占据多数优势。
周四，特朗普离他的目标更近了一步。
就在特朗普提名的美联储另一席位人选斯蒂芬·米兰（Stephen Miran）在确认听证会上遭到民主党人严苛质询的同时，司法部据报已根据普尔特（Pulte）的举报，对库克（Cook）展开刑事调查。特朗普及其盟友指控库克在就任美联储职务前在抵押贷款文件上作假——这一指控已遭其本人否认。
值得注意的是，库克是特朗普自1月上任以来指控涉嫌抵押贷款欺诈的第三位政治对手。前两位分别是纽约州总检察长利蒂希娅·詹姆斯（其提起的民事诉讼认定特朗普多年间通过虚报房地产资产获取优惠利率构成欺诈）以及加利福尼亚州民主党参议员亚当·希夫。（詹姆斯与希夫均否认相关指控，且两人均未被起诉。）
普尔特（Pulte）本周早些时候向福克斯商业频道表示："抵押贷款欺诈是我们工作的重中之重。"周四，他在CNBC节目中再次强调这一观点，称"公职人员不应免于审查"。
但当《财经论坛》节目主持人安德鲁·罗斯·索尔金向普尔特询问，是否会调查美联社和《纽约时报》关于得克萨斯州总检察长、美国参议院共和党候选人肯·帕克斯顿在抵押贷款申请中将三处不同房产列为主要住所的报道时，普尔特选择了回避。
“除非是律师或刑事转介文件已公开的内容，否则我不会置评。”他补充道：“如果事情被公开，或者我们决定将其公开，届时我会进行讨论。”
此外，据ProPublica报道，至少有三位特朗普内阁成员在抵押贷款文件中将多处房产列为“主要”住所。
再次重申：这一切与抵押贷款欺诈无关，其核心在于掌控美联储。
为何此事至关重要
美联储并非那种随着政府更迭就转变立场的普通机构。依据法律与传统，它始终保持独立且严格无党派立场。现任主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔对党派政治极为排斥，甚至会在公开场合佩戴紫色领带，以避免任何暗示倾向共和党（红色）或民主党（蓝色）的嫌疑。
该银行之所以拥有特殊地位，是因为其承担着为国家金融体系制定基准利率的核心职能。
利率如同汽车的油门和刹车踏板：通过降息（正如特朗普极力主张的那样），你可以轻踩油门让经济加速；而当经济过热时（正如我们在2022年6月达到顶峰的后疫情通胀狂潮中亲历的那样），你也可以通过加息来放缓节奏。
没有哪位总统会主动选择高利率政策——尽管放缓经济增速有助于抑制通胀，但也会抑制商业增长，导致招聘停滞甚至引发裁员。总统们自然希望自己的任期能与经济繁荣和股市上涨挂钩。
但无需远观便可明白，从长远来看，这将成为一个问题。
以土耳其为例，该国总统持有非常规且不合逻辑的观点，认为降低利率可以抑制通货膨胀，这种观点导致物价多年持续飙升，并引发该国货币崩溃。
美国虽从未经历过土耳其级别的危机，但我们从尼克松政府时期就已有前车之鉴。
1970年，尼克松任命其好友兼顾问**阿瑟·伯恩斯**（Arthur Burns）担任美联储主席。伯恩斯随后推行宽松货币政策，助总统在1972年成功连任。（历史学家对尼克松是否直接施压伯恩斯存在争议，但无可争议的结果是：伯恩斯的举措引发了一场持续10年、经历两次经济衰退才得以终结的恶性通胀周期。）
特朗普在确保央行内部忠诚度方面毫不冒险。周四的提名听证会上，白宫首席经济顾问米伦（Miran）拒绝直接声明特朗普输掉了2020年大选。当被追问美联储独立性问题时——米伦去年曾嘲讽这一概念是过时的“陈词滥调”，同时主张通过改革赋予总统对该机构更大影响力——他仅敷衍地表示“这对经济和金融市场的良好运转至关重要”，未作出更多实质性回应。
马萨诸塞州参议员、委员会民主党首席成员伊丽莎白·沃伦表示："米兰博士，你已明确表示会按照唐纳德·特朗普的意愿行事或发言。这对政治仆从或许无妨，但此举将严重破坏美联储的独立性，并导致美国家庭生活成本大幅攀升。"
关键点在于：特朗普政府试图通过非常规程序解雇库克，并任命曾批评美联储独立性的罕见经济学家米兰，以此争夺美联储控制权，此举或许能满足总统的短期需求。作为特朗普青睐的成功指标，股市甚至可能因宽松货币政策的承诺而获得提振。然而，若美联储无法被信赖以保护美国人免受恶性通胀或大规模失业的影响，几乎可以确定经济将以糟糕结局收场。
If there is just one thing you need to know about the chaos engulfing the Federal Reserve, its this: President Donald Trump wants to control the historically independent US central bank. Thats it.
There is a rash of more complicated Fed narratives competing for your attention, but every single one goes back to the reality that Trump wants to call the shots at the bank, and he cant just march in and fire everyone there the way he has in departments his administration directly oversees. Lacking the legal authority to fire the Fed chair, Jerome Powell, Trump tried to spin up a scandal over the renovation costs at the banks DC headquarters.
Now, Trump and his mini-me Bill Pulte, the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, are crowing about mortgage fraud as a pretext to fire Lisa Cook, one of the Fed policymakers who would stand in the way of Trumps power grab.
In short: Cook, a Biden appointee confirmed with bipartisan support in 2022, is one of seven key policymakers on the Feds Board of Governors. If Trump can replace her with someone more amenable to his whims, he could soon have a majority of the board in his corner.
On Thursday, Trump got closer to his goal.
At the same time that Stephen Miran , Trumps pick to fill a separate Fed seat was getting grilled by Democrats during a confirmation hearing, the Justice Department reportedly launched a criminal investigation into Cook, acting on a referral from Pulte. Trump and his allies have accused Cook of lying on mortgage documents prior to her term at the Fed an allegation she has denied.
Its worth noting here that Cook is the third perceived political enemy that Trump has accused of mortgage fraud since he took office in January. The others include New York Attorney General Letitia James the prosecutor whose civil suit against Trump found him liable for a yearslong fraud in which he lied about real estate assets to receive more favorable rates and California Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff . (James and Schiff have also denied the allegations, and neither has been charged.)
Mortgage fraud is a huge priority of ours, Pulte told Fox Business earlier this week. On Thursday, he reiterated the point on CNBC, saying public officials shouldnt be exempt from scrutiny.
But when Squawk Box host Andrew Ross Sorkin asked Pulte whether hed be looking into reports from the AP and the New York Times that Ken Paxton, Texas attorney general and Republican candidate for the US Senate, has claimed three separate homes as his primary residence on mortgage applications, Pulte ran for cover.
Unless its something thats been made public by lawyersor in criminal referrals, Im not going to comment. He added: If things are made publicor we decide to make them public, then I will talk about it.
And, according to ProPublica, at least three Trump Cabinet members have also listed more than one property as their primary residence in mortgage documents.
Once again: None of this is about mortgage fraud. It is about controlling the Fed.
Why it matters
The Fed isnt just another government agency that switches polarities with every new administration. It is, by law and tradition, independent and stridently nonpartisan. The current chair, Jerome Powell, is so allergic to partisan politics he wears a purple tie in public appearances to avoid even the suggestion of a preference for red or blue.
The reason for the banks special status has to do with its central function of setting the benchmark interest rates for the nations financial system.
Interest rates are like gas and brake pedals on a car: You can tap the gas and get the economy moving a bit faster by cutting rates (as Trump desperately wants), or you can raise interest rates to slow things down when the economy runs too hot (as we all experienced in the post-Covid inflationary fever that peaked in June 2022.)
No president would willingly choose high interest rates slowing the economy down helps control inflation, but it also crimps business growth, stalling hiring or even spurring layoffs. Naturally, presidents want their terms to be associated with a booming economy and stock market.
But you dont need to look far to see how, long-term, thats a problem.
Consider Turkey, where the presidents unconventional, illogical view that lower interest rates would tame inflation has led to a yearslong price spiral and the collapse of the countrys currency.
The United States has never come close to a Turkey-level crisis, but weve got our own cautionary tale from the Nixon administration.
In 1970, Nixon appointed a friend and adviser, Arthur Burns, to be his Fed chair. Burns went on to loosen monetary policy and help the president secure re-election in 72. (Historians debate how directly Nixon pressured Burns to do so, but whats not debatable is the result: Burns actions triggered a painful inflationary cycle that took 10 years, and two recessions, to break.)
Trump isnt taking any risks when it comes to securing loyalty within the central bank. During a confirmation hearing Thursday, Miran, the top economic adviser at the White House, refused to state outright that Trump lost the 2020 election. When grilled about Fed independence which Miran last year derided as an outdated shibboleth while advocating for changes that would give the president more sway over the agency Miran offered little more than lip service, stating that it is critical to the well functioning of the economy and financial markets.
Dr. Miran, you have made clear that you will do or say whatever Donald Trump wants, said Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the committees Democratic ranking member. That may be an ok place for political servants, but it takes an ax to Fed independence and will make life far more expensive for American families.
Bottom line: The Trump administrations attempts to wrest control of the Fed by firing Cook without due process and installing Miran, the rare economist whos criticized Fed independence could satisfy the presidents short-term needs. The stock market, Trumps favored barometer of success, may even enjoy a boost from the promise of looser monetary policy. However, its all but guaranteed to end badly for the economy if the Fed cant be trusted to protect Americans from runaway inflation or mass unemployment.
正规配资网上开户提示：文章来自网络，不代表本站观点。
沪深京指数
热点资讯
