One FOMC dissenter might have just called out the Fed for its shifting base interest-rate policy
Critics of Jerome Powell and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) have argued the group's shifting stance on when to cut the base rate has been anything but constant.
They point to a cut in the base rate in December, when Powell and his peers decided to lower the base rate despite inflation being at 2.9%—higher than the inflation rate from March to June this year. Moreover, the unemployment rate was at a relatively similar level to current readings.
Yet in 2025, and despite mounting pressure from the White House and economists to do so, Powell has thus far refused to ease interest rates.
While every member of the FOMC is aware of this rhetoric, Michelle Bowman has been the most recent to flag the issue.
'In my view, it is … important that the committee's approach to monetary policy decision-making is consistent over time—especially when we face shifting economic conditions,' Bowman said this weekend in a speech at the Kansas Bankers Association 2025 CEO and Senior Management Summit, held in Colorado Springs.
Bowman's statements are all the more interesting given that she was one of two dissenters from the Fed's recent decision on the base rate. While the FOMC decided to hold the rate at 4.25% to 4.5%, Bowman had indicated prior to the meeting that she would like to see that figure come down.
Speaking in Colorado, she added: 'I recognize and appreciate that other FOMC members may see things differently and that they were more comfortable with leaving the target range for the policy rate unchanged. I am committed to working together with my colleagues to ensure that monetary policy is appropriately positioned to achieve our dual goals of maximum employment and price stability.
'In the meantime, I will continue to carefully monitor the incoming data and information as the administration's policies, the economy, and financial markets continue to evolve.'
Questions about the motivations—and even the political nature—of the FOMC's decisions have come from influential voices in Washington, D.C. While Powell has long maintained that the Fed is not influenced by politics in any way, and has staunchly defended its independence from such influences, observers are still questioning, Why cut in 2024 but not now?
For example, Trump's former commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, told Fortune last month: 'Powell didn't have any trouble reducing interest rates. It's only since Trump got in that he has been much more cautious.'
He added: 'Whoever is in the Fed is, after all, a human being, and human beings have political preferences, they have economic preferences, so the word 'independent' doesn't necessarily mean that it will be just fact-based.'
Trusting the data
Bowman, who is the Fed's vice chair for supervision, also hinted that she (and potentially other members of the FOMC) may have lost some faith in key data releases which help inform decision-making.
'I have discussed many times in the past that, in recent years, the monthly labor market data have become increasingly difficult to interpret, in part reflecting declining survey response rates and the changing dynamics of immigration and net business creation,' Bowman said. 'It is crucial that U.S. official data accurately capture cyclical or structural changes in the labor market in real time so that we can more confidently rely on these data for monetary and economic policymaking.'
The warning comes after a shocking report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), which revealed the U.S. labor market is in far worse shape than previously believed.
The Labor Department reported on Aug. 1 that payrolls grew by just 73,000 last month, well below forecasts for about 100,000. But downward revisions for prior months alarmed investors even more, revealing that the labor market came to a near standstill over the spring. May's tally was cut from 144,000 to 19,000, and June's total was slashed from 147,000 to just 14,000, resulting in a combined cut of 258,000. The average gain over the past three months is now only 35,000.
Trump responded by firing Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the BLS, prompting questions about the Oval Office's influence over data departments.
Bowman added: 'I remain cautious about taking too much signal from data releases, but I see the latest news on economic growth, the labor market, and inflation as consistent with greater risks to the employment side of our dual mandate.
'My summary of economic projections includes three cuts for this year, which has been consistent with my forecast since last December, and the latest labor market data reinforce my view. I want to reiterate, though, that monetary policy is not on a preset course. At each FOMC meeting, my colleagues and I will make our decisions based on each of our assessments of the incoming data and the implications for and risks to the outlook, guided by the Fed's dual-mandate goals of maximum employment and stable prices.'
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Gold analyst warns of 2011-style 'blow-off top'
Carley Garner is a long-time futures trader who has seen a thing or two over a career that has lasted over twenty years, including gold market rallies and sell-offs. The massive rally in gold stocks this year to north of $3,357 per ounce has caught her attention, and not in a good way. Gold prices are up over 28% year-to-date in 2025, and the size and speed of the move (and the reasons behind it) remind her of a similar rally 14 years ago in 2011. Back then, the outcome for gold bugs wasn't fun. "The 2011 top was met with a 45% haircut that took nearly a decade to recover," according to Garner. Gold has enjoyed a perfect storm this year as macro crosscurrents hamstring the Fed's monetary policy, GDP slips, and the US debt outlook worsens. Unemployment has risen to 4.2% from 3.4% in 2023, CPI inflation of 2.7% is stubbornly above the Fed's 2% inflation target, the World Bank says GDP is expected to fall to 1.4% from 2.8% last year, and debt experts say the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act passed this year will add $3.4 trillion to the US debt by 2034. Related: Analyst expects gold to fall off the 'Wall of Worry' The risks have hammered the US Dollar, causing the Dollar Index to tumble 10% in 2025. Since gold is priced in USD, the Dollar's struggles have made it more attractive to overseas buyers eager to diversify their holdings away from US Treasuries in protest of President Trump's tariff policy. The significant uncertainty has also made antsy investors far more interested in gold than Treasuries as a safe haven. "Safe haven dollars can purchase gold, an asset that doesn't produce income, at an all-time high without a risk parachute, or they can buy Treasuries at multi-decade lows with a yield of 4% to 5% to cushion downside price risk," said Garner in a TheStreet Pro post. "Ironically, the masses select the former and pass on the latter." Many are indeed giving up on Treasuries' relatively juicy yields, fearing the worst. That may not be the best move, though, for newer gold bugs, given that gold has already rocketed to all-time highs this summer. Troubling times always increase interest in gold, and this isn't the first time that gold has put on a show. In 2011, gold similarly rallied sharply to all-time highs amid uncertainty around major banks and the economy, and aftershocks following the Great Recession, which was still fresh on investors' minds. Related: Major analyst resets gold price target after shocking economic data Remember the S&P cut the US debt rating for the first time in history in August 2011 because of the growing deficit, prompting a massive 5.5% drop in the S&P 500 on Aug. 8. The situation was so bad that Warren Buffett famously back-stopped Bank of America on Aug. 25, providing a cash influx in exchange for preferred stocks and warrants that eventually made Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway a mint when risk assets found their footing and gold lost its luster. "Although gold is known as a safe-haven asset, it has a history of stunning corrections," reminded Garner. "For instance, the 2011 top was met with a 45% haircut that took nearly a decade to recover." Like most investments, momentum can drive assets higher and lower than logic may dictate, making betting against it a risky endeavor. Still, most money is made or lost by acting ahead of the turning points that mark tops and bottoms. Given that gold has already made a major move higher, investors are wise to consider whether we're closer to a top like 2011 than a bottom like a few years ago. More Experts Stocks & Markets Podcast: Sectors to Avoid With Jay WoodsTrader makes bold call with Boeing stock after defense workers strikeVeteran fund manager sends urgent 9-word message on stocks "Gold is an asset that should only be bought when nobody wants it. If everyone is buying it, it's probably too late for anyone with a time horizon of less than a decade or longer," said Garner. There's certainly an argument that gold bullishness is widespread, with many talking positively about it as a hedge worth owning. "If you are looking for bearish analyst calls or news, you won't find it," said Garner. "But don't let this detract you from being skeptical." Gold was panned as a "dead dog acting as a drag to portfolios" three years ago, says Garner. Today, she says, "it is considered a must-hold in those same portfolios." In other words, contrarian thinking, akin to buying when everyone is selling and selling when everyone is buying, may make more sense today regarding gold than three years ago. "Just as conventional thinking was misguided then, it might be wrong today," wrote Garner. Related: Stock market gets 'kick in the pants' from startling inflation report The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Los Angeles Times
3 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Bessent says he's not pushing Fed cuts, just touting models
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he isn't calling for a series of interest-rate cuts from the Federal Reserve, just pointing out that models suggest a 'neutral' rate would be about 1.5 percentage points lower. 'I didn't tell the Fed what to do,' Bessent said Thursday in an interview on Fox Business, referring to his comments a day before about how the central bank 'could go into a series of rate cuts here.' Bessent said Thursday that 'what I said was that to get to a neutral rate on interest, that that would be approximately a 150-basis-point cut.' The so-called neutral rate is the level at which policy neither stimulates nor restricts the economy. Fed Chair Jerome Powell said July 30 that there are 'a range of views of what the neutral rate is at this moment for our economy' and that his own estimate was that the current setting was 'modestly restrictive.' 'I believe that there is room, if one believes in the neutral rate,' for a series of rate cuts, Bessent said. 'I'm not calling for one. I didn't call for one. I just said that a model of a neutral rate is approximately 150 basis points lower.' The Fed last month kept its target range for the benchmark rate at 4.25% to 4.5%. The median estimate of the neutral rate among Fed officials over the long run is 3%. Powell and many of his colleagues have for months argued that more time was needed to assess any impact on inflation and inflation expectations from President Donald Trump's tariff hikes. Trump has regularly criticized Powell for holding rates. Bessent, after taking the Treasury's helm, said he would only address past Fed actions, not future ones, but later weighed in on what he thought markets were expecting monetary policymakers to do. This week, he has taken to referring to economic models, and has repeatedly suggested a 50-basis-point rate cut is possible at the Fed's September meeting. 'It's not really the role of the Treasury secretary to opine' on the neutral rate, said Julia Coronado, founder of the research firm MacroPolicy Perspectives and a former Fed economist. 'The fact that the most senior economic official in the administration is saying these things publicly is direct, public pressure on what he wants the Fed to do.' Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, who served under Democratic President Bill Clinton, said he was 'surprised' to see Bessent's remarks on Wednesday. 'Usually that kind of judgment is not made by administration officials, and I'm not sure it's helpful for the administration to be publicly prescribing on monetary policy,' Summers said on Bloomberg Television's Wall Street Week with David Westin. Summers, a paid contributor to Bloomberg TV, also suggested that a measure of the neutral rate should incorporate the effects of large budget deficits and elevated demand for funds to pay for data centers — along with higher asset prices that reduce the flow of funds into savings. Against that backdrop, 'you wouldn't be prescribing a 175 basis point cut in rates unless we see a recession.' Interest-rate futures as of Thursday morning reflect bets that the Fed will cut rates by less than a cumulative 150 basis points by the end of next year. They also show slightly less confidence in a 25-basis-point reduction at the September meeting. The retreat came after a release on US wholesale inflation showed those prices climbed by the most in three years. Speaking to Bloomberg Television on Wednesday, Bessent said 'if you look at any model' it suggests that 'we should probably be 150, 175 basis points lower' on the Fed's benchmark. He also said that officials might have cut rates if they'd been aware of the revised data on the labor market that came out a couple of days after the latest meeting. 'I suspect we could have had rate cuts in June and July,' Bessent said. 'I don't know what model he's talking about,' said Jim Bianco, president of Bianco Research and a longtime Fed and Treasury watcher. 'There is no model I'm aware of that says it should be that low,' he said of the Fed's benchmark. Other gauges of where the Fed should be, such as the Taylor rule, also aren't arguing that the main rate should be 150 to 175 basis points lower than it is, Bianco said. He added that there have been many instances over the decades of 'cajoling Fed chairs,' and they're 'welcome to offer their opinion,' but it shouldn't change the central bank leader's opinion. Bessent repeated on Thursday that, given the context of the weaker jobs figures and not having cut rates the past couple of months, 'perhaps a 50-basis-point cut in September was warranted.' Two Fed district bank presidents said they're not backing such a move at this point. San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly said in a Wall Street Journal interview Wednesday, 'I just don't see that. I don't see the need to catch up.' St. Louis President Alberto Musalem said on CNBC Thursday, that a 50 basis-point cut would be 'unsupported by the current state of the economy and the outlook for the economy.' Flatley writes for Bloomberg.
CNBC
5 hours ago
- CNBC
Why Wall Street kept sending the S&P 500, Nasdaq to fresh records this week
The stock market ended the week higher as Wall Street speculated on how a spate of economic releases would impact the Federal Reserve's next interest rate decision. The S & P 500 and Nasdaq both gained nearly 1% over the past five sessions. Both benchmark gauges hit several record closes this week, with the S & P 500 reaching the milestone on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. The tech-heavy Nasdaq closed at record highs on Tuesday and Wednesday. Both indexes hit all-time intraday highs on Friday but closed the session modestly lower. Inflation data Stocks were pushed much higher on Tuesday, which carried the week, after the July consumer price index showed inflation had cooled more than expected. This caused Fed rate cut expectations for September to rise. The stock market's run continued into Wednesday's session. On Thursday, however, stocks lost some momentum after July's producer price index indicated that wholesale inflation rose more than expected last month. Despite higher inflation figures, though, the market odds of a rate cut at the Fed's meeting next month didn't decrease by much, according to the CME FedWatch tool. A second Fed rate cut by the end of the year is also expected. Cisco's quarter Our focus was also on quarterly earnings Wednesday evening from Cisco Systems , the latest addition to the Club's portfolio. Cisco beat analysts' expectations for the top and bottom lines during its fiscal 2025 fourth quarter. The company experienced strong revenue growth within its networking business thanks to the boom in AI infrastructure spending. Orders within the networking business surpassed $800 million during the fiscal fourth quarter, bringing the total to more than $2 billion for fiscal 2025. That's double management's goal for the year. Still, shares slipped after the release due to the significant revenue miss in Cisco's security division. That didn't shake our conviction in the stock, though. The Club reiterated our buy equivalent 1 rating , and maintained our price target of $78. "In a market that rewards AI-exposed companies with lofty valuations, Cisco trades at a very reasonable high teens price-to-earnings multiple. That valuation is too cheap to us," Jeff Marks, director of portfolio analysis for the Club, wrote in his earnings analysis. Later in the week, commentary from one Wall Street firm sent Cisco stock lower again. Shares fell 5.5% on Friday after HSBC downgraded the stock to a hold rating from a buy, and lowered its price target to $69 from $73. Analysts viewed Cisco's quarterly report as lackluster and said more stock gains would be hard to come by. "Though the company reported more than USD2bn of AI infrastructure orders in FY25, strength seems to be getting offset by weakness elsewhere," HSBC wrote in a Thursday note to clients. Record highs Although Cisco stock had a tough week, many other portfolio names experienced big runs. In fact, five Club holdings reached record highs since Monday. In no particular order, here's a breakdown of each. Goldman Sachs briefly reached an all-time high Friday of $749.05. But shares then tumbled 2.2% into the close. BlackRock hit a record Wednesday of $1,171.89. The stock drifted lower to around $1,135 by Friday's close. Broadcom on Wednesday touched $317.35, its highest stock price ever. Nvidia shares jumped to a record of $184.48 on Tuesday. Meta Platforms stock climbed to an all-time high of $796.25 on Friday. Portfolio moves We executed three trades last week, including exiting one position entirely. First, we bought more shares of Starbucks and Palo Alto Networks on Monday after unreasonable sell-offs. On Thursday, we sold the rest of our small Coterra Energy position. It no longer made sense to invest in Coterra in the current economic environment. Jim Cramer talked about this at length during the Club's August Monthly Meeting. We didn't just buy and sell, though. The Club changed ratings on two portfolio names as well. A new piece of Wall Street research led us to downgrade Salesforce on Monday to a hold-equivalent 2 rating. Analysts at Melius Research came out with a note that outlined the headwinds that generative AI could have on software-as-a-service companies like Salesforce. Shares then popped nearly 4% on Friday after filings revealed that Jeff Smith's Starboard Value increased its stake in Salesforce by 47% during the second quarter. That renewed bets that activists will push for change again, as they did with success a couple of years ago. After two terrible weeks, the stock finished this week up almost 1%. Two sessions later, the Club double upgraded Eli Lilly shares to a buy-equivalent 1 rating after CEO David Ricks and other company insiders bought a significant amount of the slumping stock. Health-care stocks, which had been struggling as a sector, have gotten a boost over the past week or so. Lilly stock was our best performer this week, jumping 12%. (See here for a full list of the stocks in Jim Cramer's Charitable Trust.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust's portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.
