|
?Deficits. Fed. Politics.
All three have massive implications for interest rates.
The Federal Open Market Committee has 12 voting members: seven Fed Governors, the New York Fed President and four regional Fed Presidents who rotate annually. While the Fed is designed to operate independently, politics can play a role, a bigger role than has historically been the case as everything in Washington has become politicized.
Will the Fed actually tighten prior to the midterm elections? Several Fed voting members would like to raise rates in effort to be vigilant on inflation and drive it back to its 2% target, yet the Administration wants lower rates.
July CPI was 3.4%, with Core CPI at 2.5%. PCE inflation, the Fed’s preferred measure, was 3.7%, with Core PCE at 3.3%. Those numbers are well above the Fed’s 2% Target, however inflation is trending lower. Energy prices impact inflation, yet the Fed can do little to impact the cost of energy.
So, what does the Fed do?
Raise rates and risk being accused of tightening into an election year?
Or hold rates and risk allowing inflation to become entrenched?
Raising rates with a massive fiscal deficit only increases the cost to finance the debt.
Fed Chair Kevin Warsh in an extraordinarily difficult position. The July meeting produced a 9–3 vote to hold rates, with three regional Fed Presidents voting for a 25-basis-point hike, and the cry to raise rates has gained momentum, which Warsh acknowledged at Jackson Hole. The debate inside the Fed is becoming more visible and Warsh would not want to lose face in the event the majority voted against his wish. This is tricky as I can't think of an occasion where the Fed Chair vote was the not in line with policy move. What happens if Chair Warsh votes to raise rates while the rest of the Committee votes to hold? That would send a negative signal to market about the credibility, cohesion of the institution.
When you combine massive deficits, elevated inflation, political pressure and a divided Fed, the outlook looks highly complex.
|