ZYTrade Editors: Judy Shelton is short votes to join the Federal Reserve Board. Rumors abound, namely that Shelton, a sound money advocate, is also a proponent for reining-in the Fed under US Treasury control. Unsurprisingly, many Senate leaders, and the Fed itself, are resisting her approval and inclusion. It would mean a Trump takeover of the Federal Reserve and a return of the Gold Standard. Is this QAnon hype, or is it a strategy in the works?
Senate Republican leaders don’t yet have 51 votes to confirm President Trump’s controversial pick to the Federal Reserve, Judy Shelton, whose nomination is facing strong opposition from prominent economists.
Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.) said Tuesday that the leadership is still “working” on mustering majority support for Shelton, who has come under criticism for her past support for returning to the gold standard.
Thune raised the possibility that Shelton may not come to the floor before Election Day, which means her nomination would be in jeopardy if Trump doesn’t win reelection.
Asked if Shelton would receive a vote before the Senate recesses for the election, Thune said: “We’ll see — as soon as she has 51 votes.”
“We’re still working it,” he said. “She’s a priority for the White House. It’s a Federal Reserve [position,] it’s important. So obviously we want to get it done but we’re not going to bring it up until we have the votes to confirm [her.]”
Shelton’s nomination to the Federal Reserve, which sets monetary policy for the nation, has faced Republican opposition since Trump announced the pick in January.
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) announced in July he would oppose Shelton’s nomination.
“I will be voting against her,” he said July 23.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who faces a tough reelection race this fall, announced in July that she too would oppose Shelton.
“I have serious concerns about this nomination,” she said in a statement July 27.
Collins criticized Shelton for calling for the Federal Reserve to be less independent of the White House and Congress.
Senate Republicans control 53 Senate seats and cannot afford any more than three defections. Vice President Pence could break a 50-50 tie to confirm Shelton.
A group of more than 100 prominent economists signed a letter last month urging senators to vote against Shelton, citing what they called her “extreme and ill-considered” views on monetary and economic policy. The list included seven Nobel laureates.
Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee including Sens. Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Richard Shelby (Ala.) raised concerns earlier this year about Shelton’s past support for devaluing the dollar to encourage exports or returning to the gold standard.
Toomey warned in February that devaluing currencies to increase exports is “a very, very dangerous path to go down,” but later announced he would support Shelton after she provided him assurances in writing. Shelton promised she would oppose using monetary policy to weaken the dollar and that doing so is not in the Fed’s direct purview.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), another member of the Banking panel, held up Shelton’s nomination for weeks to study her record.
Despite their concerns, all 13 Republicans on the Banking Committee voted to advance Shelton’s nomination in a party-line vote in late July.
Senate aides familiar with the nomination say that National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow has championed Shelton’s nomination but that it doesn’t have much support from within the Federal Reserve.
Originally posted on The Hill
Trading futures, options on futures, and forex involves substantial risk of loss and is not suitable for all investors. The use of leverage is not suitable for all investors and losses exceeding your initial deposit is possible. Carefully consider whether trading is suitable for you in light of your circumstances, knowledge, and financial resources and only risk capital should be used. Opinions, market data, and recommendations are subject to change at any time. The lower the margin used the higher the leverage and therefore increases your risk. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.