More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Don McNay

Don McNay

Posted: January 24, 2010 07:37 PM

Bernanke: The Main Street Versus Wall Street Litmus Test

What's Your Reaction:

"Poor folks ain't got a chance
Unless they organize.

Which side are you on boy?
Which side are you on?

- Florence Reece (Peter Seeger)

Ben Bernanke's re-appointment as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board is in trouble. Liberal senators, such as Russell Feingold of Wisconsin and Barbara Boxer of California, are against him. Conservative senators, like Richard Shelby of Alabama, oppose him too.

What do Boxer, Shelby and Feingold normally have in common? Nothing. You can't find another contested issue where they line up on the same side.

Bernanke is different. It is not about Republican and Democrat.

It is a vote on whether a senator is listening to Wall Street or Main Street.

The vote on Bernanke lets us see which side each senator is on.

Boxer was quoted in the New York Times, saying "It is time for Main Street to have a champion at the Fed."

It is time, indeed.

Main Street supporters know that Bernanke has to go. The Wall Street crowd wants to keep Ben in the worst way. He is completely their guy.

Just ask the people at Goldman Sachs or AIG.

My biggest disappointment in President Obama, a man I voted for, is that he has consistently sided with Wall Street over Main Street.

Obama has supported each and every bailout, appointed Timothy Geithner to run the Treasury and appointed Dr. Lawrence Summers to whisper in his ear at the White House.

Naturally, Obama is in favor of giving Bernanke another shot. That is what the Wall Street crowd is calling for.

I was vehemently opposed to Bernanke when he was first appointed by President George W. Bush. Outside of opposition by Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky, Bernanke's Senate confirmation was a love fest and his confirmation was a coronation.

Which led to him presiding over one of the great economic disasters in history.

Nothing in Bernanke's background clued him in to Main Street. He has never met a payroll, never had to get a business loan and spent most of his life hanging in the faculty lounge at Princeton.

It's one thing to write a thesis. It's another to have to live with your decisions, like those of us on Main Street do.

They have a word for people who screw up on Main Street: bankrupt.

They have a word for people who screw up on Wall Street: bailout.

They have a word for people for screw up in Washington: re-appointment.

Thus, Wall Street and Washington is lining up to give Bernanke another shot.

Senator Christopher Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking committee, responded to the opposition in an "inside the beltway" fashion. The New York Times quotes Dodd as saying that a vote against Bernanke would send "the worst signal to the market right now" and could "lead us into an economic tailspin." What kind of economic tailspin? Like that one Bernanke led us into last year? Or the bigger one, the year before that?

Dodd, whose close ties to lobbyists and sweetheart loans from Countrywide is leading to his premature retirement, considered himself a champion of "working people." I guess Dodd defines "working people" as those who work for investment banks.

It makes sense to get rid of Bernanke. You don't rehire a football coach who keeps losing games. Bernanke's term as Federal Reserve Chair is like watching the Cincinnati Bengals for the decade of 1990's. They started in last place and they stayed in last place. At least the Bengals changed coaches. President Obama needs to do the same at the Federal Reserve.

I would love to see a Federal Reserve Chair who was not a product of the Wall Street-Washington alliance -- someone from the heartland, who doesn't do power lunches at the Four Seasons or hang at the Harvard faculty club. Someone who had a real job at least at some point in his (or her) life.

If Warren Buffett was available, he would be my pick. If not Warren, then someone with the same kind of Midwestern values and sensibilities.

Since the upset election of Senator Scott Brown in Massachusetts, there has been a lot of talk about populist anger. Washington is just starting to "get" what those of us on Main Street have known for a long time.

People are broke, frustrated and angry and want Washington to do something to help them.

The vote on Bernanke is a litmus test. Senators have a chance to show us whether they will continue to suck up to Wall Street or whether to find someone who is listening to the voice of Main Street.

We will be watching our senators and asking, "What side are you on?"

Don McNay, CLU, ChFC, MSFS, CSSC is one of the world's leading authorities in helping people deal with "Big Money" issues. McNay is an award winning, syndicated financial columnist and Huffington Post Contributor. You can read more about Don at www.donmcnay.com. McNay founded McNay Settlement Group, a structured settlement and financial consulting firm, in 1983 and Kentucky Guardianship Administrators LLC in 2000. You can read more about both at www.mcnay.com. McNay has Master's Degrees from Vanderbilt and the American College and is in the Eastern Kentucky University Hall of Distinguished Alumni. McNay has written two books. Most recent is Son of a Son of a Gambler: Winners, Losers and What to Do When You Win The Lottery McNay is a lifetime member of the Million Dollar Round Table and has four professional designations in the financial services field.

 
 
 

Follow Don McNay on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Donmcnay

 
 
  • Comments
  • 18
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DebtNavigation
Attorney and Author
07:34 PM on 01/25/2010
Main Street America should make Bernanke's reappointment irrelevant--maybe massive, coordinated default on business and personal debts to Wall Street. I hope that in Sertoma and Rotary breakfasts across America, state court judges will hint to businesspeople that while the Marquette decision ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquette_Nat._Bank_of_Minneapolis_v._First_of_Omaha_Service_Corp. ) may stop prosecutions of usury and prevent courts from enjoining such transactions, state courts can do what they want with these debts when banks try to enforce them and the banks can't get to federal court unless the debts exceed $75,000.

Judges know that 30% interest isn't right when banks borrow at zero percent, and eventually the judges will act to maintain the viability of their own communities.

These judges are masters of their domains, and if they decide that the debt hasn't been adequately proven or they want to cut down the interest they give to the bank (and in many states judgments will have a much lower interest rate going forward regardless--something debtors should think about if for some reason they're desperate to avoid a judgment), there isn't going to be a whole lot the banks can do about it.

If you've got debt problems, you may want to take a look at my book "Debt Hope: Down and Dirty Survival Strategies" ... right now it's a free read on Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/25443175/Debt-Hope-Down-and-Dirty-Survival-Strategies-Evaluation-Version-Complete
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DebtNavigation
Attorney and Author
09:09 PM on 01/25/2010
One Sheriff is already making it clear that a certain level of decoupling from the will of Washington is about to take place (I have no doubt that if his local judicial circuit wanted to buck Marquette he'd have no problem putting himself and his deputies at their disposal):

http://www.henrymakow.com/the_states_can_tell_the_feds_t.html
photo
SoylentGreenIsPeople
Hmmm........Tastes Like Chicken !
02:58 PM on 01/25/2010
Bernanke's disdain for transparency should cancel any reappointment plans.With all of the talented people out of work we should have no problem finding someone talented and honest. Any corruption needs to be exposed and prosecuted. Looking the other way will tank the market.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidShort
12:50 PM on 01/25/2010
yes, it is a litmus test. Those that favor the idea that punishing the large organisations for being large in difference to those who are small because they either cannot grow or do not grow should be removed. Since when is it wrong to succeed? Since when should we worship 'the little guy'? We should aim to suceed, and hold those who do up as examples of what we can do. Not demonize them for having the audacity to rise above the rest of us.
11:30 AM on 01/25/2010
This is a trick question.............right?

You're asking professional politicians to make a choice between doing their jobs for the people that voted them into office, or supporting those that pour 3.33 Billion (yes with a B) into their pockets via the corporate back door just last year alone?

This one's a no brainer. It was greed that caused the mess, and greed that will see that it continues.

In 1987 the fictional film "Wall Street" said "Greed is good".

In 2001 and 2003 the real U.S. Congress, through tax cuts for the wealthy, said "Greed is God".
10:28 AM on 01/25/2010
I wager that the following will happen. If there is enough people that contact their representatives in opposition to the re-posting then it may not happen. However; Obama, et al. are going to do their damnedest to make certain that Brown is the only control they have lost. To that end, expect a re-appointment with a smattering of opposition not withstanding. Bernake would love to lay blame on the past fed chairman, just like this president is going to regale us with tales of how the previous administration left this mess, as did the prior administration before him. There is no means to an end, in Washington, so long as there are the talking heads, and multi-millionaires, and special interest groups controlling both of our houses.

Scott Brown may have driven an old truck, so did Lamar Alexander in TN. My friends, I wager again, there will be reappointment.
09:40 AM on 01/25/2010
This vote will be another clarifying moment and we will see which democrats are alligned with the people and those who are there to do work for wall street.
08:41 AM on 01/25/2010
Totally AGREE!

The real reason they must appoint Bernacke.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQyFxBG6dhY
07:47 AM on 01/25/2010
great blog . . bernanke and rahm and geitner all have to go . . . the government needs to take over the fed . . and Wall Street must bow to Main Street . . . Obama should remember that it was the main street that got him elected not wall street
07:03 AM on 01/25/2010
Hey guys,

You need to read this interesting story (fits right in with the above article):

A Real or Fictional Story of Corporate Deceit and Fraud; and the United States Governments involvement to cover it up.

http://clevelandssecretclub.blogspot.com/2010/01/real-or-fictional-story-of-corporate.html
photo
guveqzero
Inventor and Innovator
03:50 AM on 01/25/2010
The litmus test to replace Bernanke is:
1. Full Fed transparency
2. Plan on how the Fed can reduce unemployment
3. Reduce focus on zero inflation policy
4. Plan on how to get banks go loan money for US projects
01:19 AM on 01/25/2010
Great blog! Tell it like it is! :-)
12:12 AM on 01/25/2010
This witchhunt against Bernanke by members of Congress is all just their attempt to pass the buck and gloss over their own fiscal dereliction of duty.

If Congress could break their habit with profligate spending, the workings of the Fed would be a non-issue.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
themodernleader
12:11 AM on 01/25/2010
We need a person at the Fed who has integrity, committment and accountability as his companions and the Constitution as his source of inspiration and direction. Buffet appears to have been corrupted by insider favoritism and media adulation. Some (if not most) people lose sight of the important things in the glare of hoopla and ass kissers.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcaunter
Profile: schizoid, INTJ, IQ145
11:22 PM on 01/24/2010
I wrote my Senator a few days ago, telling him that I was watching what he did on this Bernanke thing real close, and that something just like MA could happen right here in Florida if he wasn't careful.

We'll see how it goes.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:49 PM on 01/24/2010
Perhaps rejecting Bernanke and getting warren or someone in there would be a turning point. Perhaps.
It amazes me how the dems both in congress and those in the administration are so out of touch with their base. Have they forgotten that just one year agao that we voted for change? Or do they even care?
Bernanke is not change we can believe in.
09:54 PM on 01/24/2010
Warren Buffet as a populist? Give us all a break. He's spent his life taking care of himself not others. Maybe the head of the Fed in S.F. might be a good head for the Fed. But Billionaire Buffett? No way!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:08 PM on 01/25/2010
Elizabeth Warren