logo
Republican senators caution Trump against firing Fed chair Jerome Powell

Republican senators caution Trump against firing Fed chair Jerome Powell

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is gaining some key backing on Capitol Hill from GOP senators who fear the repercussions if President Donald Trump follows through with threats to try and remove the politically independent central banker.
As Trump seemingly waffled back and forth this week on trying to dismiss the Fed chair, some Republicans in Congress began to speak up and warn that such a move would be a mistake. Trump would potentially obliterate the Fed's independence from political influence and inject uncertainty into the foundations of the U.S. economy if he fires Powell.
'If anybody thinks it would be a good idea for the Fed to become another agency in the government subject to the president, they're making a huge mistake,' GOP North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said in a floor speech.
The measure of support from GOP members of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs showed how traditional Republicans are carefully navigating a presidency in which Trump often flirts with ideas — like steep tariffs or firing the Fed chair — that threaten to undermine confidence in the U.S. economy.
Tillis, who recently decided not to seek reelection after clashing with Trump, later told The Associated Press that the economic fallout from Powell's firing would mostly hurt 'little guys like me that grew up in trailer parks that may have a few thousand dollars in a 401k.'
He also pointed out that the underlying complaint that Trump has with the Fed — its reluctance to cut interest rates — is not controlled by Powell alone, but instead a 12-member committee.
'The markets expect an independent, central bank,' said GOP South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds, who cautioned against firing Powell. 'And if they thought for a minute that he wasn't independent, it would cast a spell over the forecasts and the integrity of the decisions being made by the bank.'
'The most incompetent, worst Federal Reserve chairman in American history should resign,' said GOP Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno.
Trump said he was also encouraged to fire Powell during a meeting with about a dozen far-right House members Tuesday evening.
Do presidents have authority to fire the Fed chair?
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters that he was 'unhappy with the leadership" at the Fed, but added 'I'm honestly not sure whether that executive authority exists' to fire Powell.
House Financial Services Committee chair French Hill has underscored that presidents don't have the authority to fire the Fed chair, yet has also been sympathetic to Trump's complaints about Powell's leadership. He and other Republicans have also noted that Powell's term as chair is ending next year anyway, and Trump will have an opportunity to name a new chair then.
When Congress started the Federal Reserve over 100 years ago, it insulated it from political pressure by stipulating that its governors and chair could only be fired 'for cause' — a higher bar than most political appointees. However, the Trump administration has maneuvered to meet that standard by accusing Powell of mishandling a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Fed's headquarters.
'When his initial attempts to bully Powell failed, Trump and Republicans in Congress suddenly decided to look into how much the Fed is spending on building renovations,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, said in a speech Wednesday. 'Independence does not mean impunity and I have long pushed for more transparency and accountability at the Fed. But give me a break.'
After Powell sent Congress a letter detailing parts of the renovation project, Sen. Tim Scott, the Senate Banking Committee chair, released a short statement saying Scott 'has continued to call for increased transparency and accountability at the Federal Reserve, and this letter is consistent with improving the communication and transparency he is seeking.'
Avoiding a protracted legal battle
"That would be litigated and I don't see a reason, for cause or otherwise, to remove him,' Sen. John Kennedy, a Republican member of the Senate committee that oversees the Fed, told reporters this week.
He added that he understood the president's 'frustration' with the Fed's reluctance to lower interest rates as it tries to tamp down inflation, saying, 'I get that, but I think it's very important the Federal Reserve remains independent.'
Even those Republicans who argued that the president has grounds to fire Powell and piled criticism on the central banker conceded that it would still be a painful step.
'That's a decision the president will make, and he's being very deliberate about it," said Moreno, the Ohio senator who called for Powell's resignation. 'But I don't think we should put the country through any of that."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Epstein's Ex Says He And Trump Had A ‘Very Close' Friendship And Were ‘Up to No Good'
Epstein's Ex Says He And Trump Had A ‘Very Close' Friendship And Were ‘Up to No Good'

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Epstein's Ex Says He And Trump Had A ‘Very Close' Friendship And Were ‘Up to No Good'

A former Sports Illustrated model who was romantically involved with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein claimed Friday that her ex and President Donald Trump were quite close, adding more to the ongoing controversy surrounding the Epstein files. 'They were best friends,' Stacey Williams told CNN host Brianna Keilar on Friday night. 'I dated Jeffrey for a period of more or less, I think about four or five months, and the only friend that he would mention every time we saw each other or had a phone conversation was Donald.' #JeffreyEpstein's ex girlfriend accuses #Trump of groping her in front of #Epstein in 1993: 'That was his bro. That was his wingman…. They were very, very close.'#CNN#BreakingNews#EpsteinFiles# — Erin Burnett OutFront (@OutFrontCNN) July 19, 2025 Trump and his administration recently faced scrutiny over their handling of Epstein's sex abuse case after building up hype for the files' release — only for the Department of Justice and FBI to say there was no evidence Epstein was murdered in jail, nor did he have a so-called 'client list.' Those findings triggered a shift in the MAGA base, as many of Trump's supporters began to turn against him and the administration. Since then, Trump has tried to distance himself from the Epstein case, even calling his supporters 'stupid' and 'foolish' for speculating about it. Williams told Keilar on Friday that Trump was Epstein's 'bro' and 'his wingman,' claiming the two were 'very close and they were up to no good.' Williams previously came out with a bombshell accusation against the president during his campaign in October, claiming Trump had groped her in 1993 during an encounter facilitated by Epstein himself. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt denied William's accusations last year, saying 'it's obvious this fake story was contrived by the Harris campaign.' However, Williams revisited that encounter on Friday. 'You know when that happens in broad daylight in someone's office and an assistant is walking back and forth, you're in shock,' Williams told Keilar. The president has sued reporters of The Wall Street Journal for publishing the contents of a lewd birthday card he allegedly sent Epstein in 2003, featuring a drawing of a naked woman and a message that read 'Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.' Trump called the message fake, claiming he never 'wrote a picture' in his life and that he doesn't 'draw pictures of women.' 'It's not my language. It's not my words,' the president said. According to Williams, that birthday card was not out of character for the Epstein-Trump duo. 'Are you kidding me? I know what they were up to together. It happened to me. I was polygraphed. I have the post-assault postcard with a love note,' Williams said. 'So I have the receipts. Where are Donald Trump's receipts? Where are they? I know what they were up to together, and I know what that means. It's very clear. It wasn't baking or fishing.' Related... Why Donald Trump's Jeffrey Epstein Cover-Up Matters Trump Sues WSJ Reporters, Murdoch For Libel After Epstein Birthday Card Story Fox News Host Laura Ingraham Teases Bombshell Trump-Epstein Report... Only To Ignore It

EPA cuts its scientific research office, as layoffs set to take effect
EPA cuts its scientific research office, as layoffs set to take effect

USA Today

time25 minutes ago

  • USA Today

EPA cuts its scientific research office, as layoffs set to take effect

The research and development office had been in the crosshairs of organizations allied with President Donald Trump. The Environmental Protection Agency eliminated its scientific research office in the Trump administration's latest cuts to the federal workforce. The change, announced July 18, affects the Office of Research and Development, which provided EPA with information to make decisions on standards for human health and the environment. EPA will now have a new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions, according to an agency news release. 'Under President Trump's leadership, EPA has taken a close look at our operations to ensure the agency is better equipped than ever to deliver on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment while Powering the Great American Comeback,' Lee Zeldin, the agency's administrator, said in a statement. 'This reduction in force will ensure we can better fulfill that mission while being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars.' Officials said the creation of the applied science and environmental solutions office would allow EPA to prioritize research and science while putting it 'at the forefront of rulemakings and technical assistance to states.' EPA said organizational changes are saving nearly $750 million. The agency had already been subject to cuts in the new administration. A July 8 Supreme Court ruling allowed the Trump administration to implement sweeping reductions by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. In January, EPA had 16,155 employees, but the agency said it will now have 12,448 workers. It's unclear how many staff are affected by the July 18 announcement, while some will be reassigned in the agency. In an email, an EPA spokesperson said the next step would be sending notices to individual employees. The office includes biologists, chemists, epidemiologists and toxicologists. Scientists deal with emerging pollutants, including researching environmental emergencies such as floods, train derailments and wildfires, according to Nicole Cantello, legislative and political director for the American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, which represents EPA workers. "EPA is hellbent on destroying the foremost environmental research organization in the world," Cantello said. "That will only result in dirty air, dirty water and more health risks for the American people." Justin Chen, the union president, said the research and development office also sets regulatory guidelines for measuring pollutant levels. The restructuring places scientific research closer to the administrator, a political appointee, who "you can very well see turning a blind eye on things that may be inconvenient to friends of the administration," Chen said. In March, Democrats on the House science committee said there were about 1,540 employees across the country in EPA's reorganization plan of the Office of Research and Development. Lawmakers warned the plans would eliminate the EPA research and development office staffing by about 50-75%. The New York Times first reported on the plans. 'The obliteration of (the Office of Research and Development) will have generational impacts on Americans' health and safety,' Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-California, the committee's ranking chair, said in a July 18 statement. 'This is a travesty.' The research and development office had been in the crosshairs of organizations allied with Trump, as the Times reported. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, specifically cited the EPA science office in Project 2025, the blueprint for Trump to reconfigure and downsize the federal government. Eduardo Cuevas is based in New York City. Reach him by email at emcuevas1@ or on Signal at emcuevas.01.

Democrats' 2024 autopsy is described as avoiding the likeliest cause of death
Democrats' 2024 autopsy is described as avoiding the likeliest cause of death

Boston Globe

time25 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Democrats' 2024 autopsy is described as avoiding the likeliest cause of death

Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Party officials described the draft document as focusing on the 2024 election as a whole, but not on the presidential campaign — which is something like eating at a steakhouse and then reviewing the salad. Advertisement Producing a tough-minded public review of a national electoral defeat would be a politically delicate exercise under any circumstance, given the need to find fault with the work and judgment of important party leaders and strategists. It is particularly fraught for the new DNC chair, Ken Martin, who promised a post-election review from his first day on the job but whose first few months in the role have been plagued by infighting and financial strains. Advertisement 'We are not interested in second-guessing campaign tactics or decisions of campaign operatives,' said Jane Kleeb, the Nebraska Democratic chair, who heads the association of Democratic state chairs and is a close ally of Martin. 'We are interested in what voters turned out for Republicans and Democrats, and how we can fix this moving forward.' Locked out of power at the federal level, Democrats are struggling to show that they have taken to heart the message that voters sent in November and are well suited to regain power in future elections. The review, which was begun in March and is being led by Paul Rivera, a veteran Democratic operative, is not yet complete and the report is not fully drafted. Rivera nonetheless has begun briefing people on what the report has found so far, and those briefings suggest that the Democratic autopsy will avoid addressing some of the likeliest or leading causes of death. Among those is whether Biden should have run for reelection. Some of Harris' top aides have faulted him for dropping out so late that she had just 107 days to campaign as the presidential nominee. But Biden's son Hunter said on a podcast this past week that Democrats lost 'because we did not remain loyal' to his father. Top Democrats said they did not intend for the report to address strategic decisions made by leaders of the Biden and Harris campaigns. Indeed, in a sign of the report's narrow scope, more than half a dozen people who were senior officials on the campaigns say they have not yet been interviewed. Advertisement DNC officials cautioned that interviews were still taking place and the report's conclusions might change before it is released this fall. 'We're glad to see there's so much interest in an after-action report on how Democrats can win again,' Rivera said. 'But folks might be better off holding their applause, or their criticism, until we have had a chance to complete our work and people can actually read it.' People briefed on the report's progress said they had been told it would focus more on outside groups and super political action committees that spent hundreds of millions of dollars aiding the Biden and Harris campaigns through advertising, voter registration drives and turnout efforts. Kleeb said she expected the report to accelerate the party's diversion of resources from advertising to organizing. 'The days of us spending millions and millions of dollars on traditional TV ads are over,' she said. 'And I do think that this report will put an exclamation point on that.' In particular, the people briefed on it said, the after-action review is expected to place blame with Future Forward, the party's main super PAC, which spent $560 million to support Biden and then Harris. They said the report would argue that Future Forward spent far too much propping up Harris and not nearly enough attacking Trump. It is expected to argue that Future Forward's advertising approach was too focused on television programs to be effective. And it will review the lack of coordination between the super PAC's advertising and the Harris campaign's, which were often not in sync. A Future Forward document that was distributed to donors and reviewed by The New York Times said about half of the super PAC's advertising was delivered on digital platforms, which includes television-like streaming services. The group said it spent more than $51 million just on YouTube ads. Advertisement A Future Forward aide, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the group's operations, said just 13% of its advertising was positive about Harris, with the rest attacking Trump. ( The critiques of Future Forward will not be new to Democrats who read real-time coverage of the campaign last year, along with more recent book-length and magazine accounts of the Biden and Harris campaigns. A DNC official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that Future Forward had been reflective and candid in its conversations with the review's authors, denied that Future Forward would be blamed for the loss and insisted that any criticisms of the group would also apply to the broader Democratic world. Rivera has conducted more than 200 interviews with officials from all 50 states, an aide said. 'The DNC's post-election review is not a finger-pointing exercise; it's about bringing together Democrats across the ecosystem to adopt an actionable playbook to win, not just for 2026 and 2028, but to dominate for cycles to come,' said Rosemary Boeglin, a spokesperson for the committee. 'Democrats are clear-eyed about the challenges facing the party — many of which are rooted well before the 2024 cycle — and it requires all of us to make structural changes in how we run campaigns.' Rivera's team has included aides to Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Rep. Raul Ruiz of California. Walz, the party's 2024 nominee for vice president, has spent time since November on an atonement tour publicly explaining what he thought went wrong in the campaign, including what he saw as his own missteps. Advertisement The DNC's election review, which will extend to contests for Congress and state offices, is not the only one underway. Jen O'Malley Dillon, who oversaw the Biden and Harris campaigns, is involved in a separate monthslong project being led by Melissa Williams, a former top official at Emily's List who oversaw the group's independent political spending. That project is seeking to piece together as comprehensively as possible the technical and tactical decisions made both by the campaign and leading outside groups, and to document the results from those spending decisions, according to three people with knowledge of the research. The results are not expected to be made public but rather to be circulated privately among Democratic strategists to provide a fuller record and greater understanding of what happened, the people said. A third look back is being led by the Strategic Victory Fund, a network of liberal donors and organizations. Scott Anderson, the group's president, said it had so far interviewed more than 100 people, including top officials from the Biden and Harris campaign and the DNC. Anderson said he did not intend to make its report public but would instead use it to inform Democratic donors and decision makers. 'So many people in my world, after 2016, jumped into a resistance mode that there wasn't a real thoughtful moment to talk for a minute with all the key people about what we're doing right and wrong about every aspect of politics and culture,' Anderson said. 'We really need to take a step back in a way that I don't feel was done after 2016, and have hard conversations.' Advertisement The DNC's report is expected to be far different from the so-called autopsy that Republicans produced after the 2012 election of Barack Obama. In March 2013, the Republican National Committee released a 100-page 'Growth and Opportunity Project' report that declared the GOP was in an 'ideological cul-de-sac' and called for moderation on immigration along with a number of other changes. While Republican leaders did adopt many of its recommendations in time for the 2016 election, Trump's campaign ran counter to many of the changes the RNC had proposed, and he has since remade the Republican Party in his image. This article originally appeared in

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store