Republican senators caution Trump against firing Fed chair Jerome Powell
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.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
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.
Advertisement
'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.'
Still, plenty of other Republicans think that dismissing Powell is a fine idea.
'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.'
Advertisement
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
Regardless, it would be legally dubious to fire Powell over the renovation.
'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.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
UN chief urges tech sector to power data centers with renewables
By Valerie Volcovici WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.N. Secretary General António Guterres on Tuesday called on tech companies to power the build out of data centers with 100% renewable energy by 2030, even as the industry turns to gas and coal-fired power plants to meet surging demand. The secretary general made his case for why he believes energy-hungry data centers should lock in a future of clean energy, saying the transition to renewable energy is inevitable, even as some countries and companies still embrace fossil fuels. "The future is being built in the cloud," Guterres said in a speech at the United Nations' headquarters in New York. "It must be powered by the sun, the wind, and the promise of a better world." His appeal to technology companies comes a day before U.S. President Donald Trump unveils his administration's AI Action Plan, which is expected to contain a number of executive actions aimed at easing restrictions on land use and energy production to unleash artificial intelligence development. Trump has declared a national energy emergency to address the vast amounts of energy needed by data centers to power AI to compete with China and enable him to ease environmental restrictions to build more power plants fueled by gas, coal and nuclear. Top economic rivals, the U.S. and China, are locked in a technological arms race over who can dominate AI. At the same time, Trump has issued executive orders and signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that curtails the use of incentives for wind and solar energy, which dominate the queue of new power generation waiting to connect to the electric grid. Guterres also appealed to governments to ready new national climate plans to deliver the goals of the Paris climate agreement by September that will lock-in a transition away from fossil fuels. He said this moment is an opportunity for governments to meet all new electricity demand with renewables and use water sustainably in cooling systems.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
3 Money Moves the Middle Class Should Make After the Passing of Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
President Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' finally cleared the House and the Senate and was signed by the president on July 4. The bill has several policies that could impact the middle class. Making some money moves and preparing for the new changes can help you save money and grow your portfolio. Read Next: Check Out: Here are some of the top money moves the middle class should make. Also see how much the definition of middle class has changed in every state. Capitalize on Clean Energy Credits Now The bill is cycling out of energy credits, which affect electric vehicles, solar panels and other clean energy sources. Chad Gammon, CFP, owner of Custom Fit Financial, suggested making clean energy purchases before the deadline if you've been holding out. 'If you are considering any upgrades, now would be the time to do it. Some credits, such as electric vehicles, are available until September 30, 2025. Other credits, like the residential clean energy credit, will end on December 31, 2025. This can help if you anticipate higher energy bills in the years to come, and reputable installers can assist with an estimated payback period,' he said. Be Aware: Open a 'Trump Account' A 'Trump account' can give your child a head start with investing money and accumulating wealth. Gammon highlighted the promising opportunity while encouraging people to monitor how it will work before investing additional money. 'If you have a child in 2025, I'd look into opening a 'Trump account.' The federal government will give $1,000 as a starter contribution. There are options to contribute further. I'd wait for more details on that, but would set it up for the initial $1,000,' he said. Children who are born between 2025 and 2028 are eligible for a $1,000 deposit, per CNBC. The money in the account will be invested in a fund that tracks the U.S. stock market, the outlet reported. Plan Your Taxes The bill can reduce your tax burden, especially if you use the standard deduction. Gammon explained how the new bill can add more money to your wallet. 'I would also look at your estimated 2025 taxes and adjust withholdings, if needed. The standard deductions moved for [couples who are married and filing jointly] from $30,000 to $31,500, or if you are single, it went from $15,000 to $15,750. This could lower your tax liability, where you can adjust your withholdings on your W-4 and free up extra monthly cash,' he said. Seniors can also get a boosted tax deduction thanks to the bill. Seniors who are 65 or older can get an additional $6,000 tax deduction if their modified adjusted gross income is below $75,000. Married couples filing jointly can capitalize on the additional tax deduction if their combined modified adjusted gross income is below $150,000. This additional tax deduction for seniors currently applies for the tax years 2025 to 2028. Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 These Cars May Seem Expensive, but They Rarely Need Repairs 7 Things You'll Be Happy You Downsized in Retirement This article originally appeared on 3 Money Moves the Middle Class Should Make After the Passing of Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Sign in to access your portfolio
Forbes
22 minutes ago
- Forbes
Can States Handle Disasters Without FEMA? The Legal Gaps Business Leaders Should Know
HUNT, TEXAS - JULY 6: Vehicles sit submerged as a search and rescue worker looks through debris for ... More any survivors or remains of people swept up in the flash flooding on July 6, 2025 in Hunt, Texas. Heavy rainfall caused flooding along the Guadalupe River in central Texas with multiple fatalities reported. (Photo by) A year already marked by record-smashing heatwaves, catastrophic storms, and deadly flash floods is forcing business leaders to reckon with an unsettling question: What happens if the federal government pulls back from disaster response? The idea of handling disasters without FEMA is not an abstract worry. In recent weeks, political debates have intensified over proposals to reduce federal spending on disaster relief or even eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) after the 2025 hurricane season, as reported by NBC News. Former President Trump and some congressional leaders have floated plans to shift primary responsibility for disaster recovery to state governments—a move that could leave businesses navigating a patchwork of legal systems without the backstop they've come to rely on for decades. This uncertainty comes as disasters batter communities from coast to coast. In the first half of 2025 alone, the U.S. suffered at least 15 billion-dollar weather disasters, including historic flooding, tornado outbreaks, and prolonged heat waves, according to Yale Climate Connections. Just this past weekend, flash floods devastated Kerr County, Texas, forcing rescues and shutting down businesses in a region still recovering from earlier storms. For business owners, investors, and insurers, this brewing shift raises urgent questions: If FEMA disappears, can state laws and budgets fill the gap? Will private enterprises have to shoulder more responsibility for disaster planning and recovery? And which states are prepared—or dangerously unprepared—to protect their residents and economic lifelines in a post-FEMA landscape? A Federal Safety Net Under ThreatALTADENA, CALIFORNIA - JANUARY 30: People walk past a FEMA sign following a press conference at the ... More Altadena Disaster Recovery Center on January 30, 2025 in Altadena, California. House Democratic leaders and local officials held the press conference near the Eaton Fire burn zone to call for federal disaster assistance following the devastating wildfires in Los Angeles County. (Photo by) Since its founding in 1979, FEMA has been the cornerstone of America's disaster response. It funds emergency shelters, debris removal, rebuilding grants, and cash assistance for displaced families. Critically for businesses, FEMA programs like the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant fund projects that reduce future risks, a crucial buffer as extreme weather grows more frequent. Yet the agency has long faced political crossfire, with critics labeling it bloated or inefficient. Earlier this year, a lawsuit was filed against the Trump administration's previous halt to BRIC funding for certain states, highlighting how political swings can upend even well-established federal programs. If proposals to wind down FEMA proceed, business leaders would be left relying on a fragmented patchwork of state disaster laws—many of which, my research suggests, lack the resources or legal frameworks to handle large-scale crises. State Disaster Laws Are A Patchwork of Authority Every U.S. state has laws empowering governors and local officials to declare emergencies and coordinate response efforts. Yet those powers vary widely in scope, funding, and legal protections for vulnerable communities. Despite these structures, most states still rely heavily on FEMA for funding, specialized teams, and logistical support. Without FEMA, states would have to cover enormous costs themselves. For example, after Hurricane Harvey, Texas received over $13 billion in FEMA aid, money that state coffers alone could not match. The Business Risks Of A FEMA Void Businesses have more skin in this game than ever. Beyond humanitarian concerns, legal and financial risks loom if federal safety nets vanish. Federal aid often helps cover costs insurers won't, such as temporary housing, debris removal, and infrastructure repair. Without that aid, insurance companies may face larger payouts or withdraw entirely from high-risk markets. In Florida, for example, multiple insurers have already exited the market due to hurricane risks, leaving businesses scrambling for coverage. A weakened federal role could mean higher premiums, stricter underwriting, or outright denial of coverage in disaster-prone regions, especially for small and midsize enterprises without deep cash reserves. If state laws differ significantly on evacuation orders, business owners may be caught between conflicting mandates. For instance, if local officials order an evacuation, but state law vests that authority only in the governor, businesses face legal ambiguity about when to close operations, protect staff, or move inventory. Disaster response gaps also raise potential civil rights issues. Federal laws like the Stafford Act prohibit discrimination in disaster aid based on race, disability, or language. Many states lack comparable mandates, meaning vulnerable communities—and businesses serving them—could fall through the cracks if federal oversight disappears. Companies with operations across multiple states face a regulatory minefield if FEMA's uniform national standards vanish. Without coordinated federal logistics, restoring supply chains and reopening businesses could take longer, increasing downtime and losses. Which States Are Ready? Which Aren't? Few states are fully prepared to absorb FEMA's responsibilities. According to my analysis of disaster laws across the South and Mid-Atlantic, only a handful—like Virginia and Texas—have begun integrating equity planning, vulnerable population registries, and robust local emergency powers into state statutes. Other states, particularly smaller ones with limited budgets, may lack: That leaves gaps businesses can't ignore. A company operating in Virginia might navigate disaster recovery relatively smoothly, while the same company in Mississippi or Georgia could face a chaotic patchwork of legal obligations, prolonged closures, and community backlash. What Business Leaders Should Do Now While FEMA's fate remains uncertain, businesses should: FEMA's potential dismantling would represent the biggest shift in American disaster management in generations. Businesses that fail to prepare for handling disasters without FEMA amidst a state-led disaster regime risk higher costs, legal headaches, and reputational damage. Disasters don't respect state lines, but the laws governing them increasingly do. For business leaders, understanding those legal boundaries might be the key to survival in a future where the federal safety net is no longer guaranteed.
