The Fed’s independence has become a constitutional absurdity



The independence of the Federal Reserve System has become a major source of public controversy. As political leaders signal dissatisfaction with monetary policy, officials and commentators rush to defend the central bank’s insulation from democratic pressure. We are told, as if it were self-evident, that central bank independence is a pillar of sound economic governance.

But this confidence is misplaced. The economic case for central bank independence is far weaker than its defenders suggest. And the constitutional case is weaker still.

Officials entrusted with such consequential authority must ultimately answer to elected leadership.

Start with economics. The standard argument is that independent central banks deliver low and stable inflation because they are insulated from short-term political incentives. Elected officials, facing electoral pressures, might be tempted to juice the economy with artificially loose monetary policy. By contrast, independent technocrats can take the long view.

Early empirical studies did show that countries with independent central banks experienced lower inflation. Yet more recent research has cast doubt on this relationship. The correlation is sensitive to different samples and methods. In many cases, the supposed benefits of independence disappear entirely.

A more plausible explanation has emerged. Countries that enjoy low and stable inflation share deeper institutional characteristics: respect for the rule of law, stable political systems, and credible commitments to property rights. These are the real foundations of sound money. Central bank independence accompanies these basic governance norms, but its stand-alone effect is debatable.

This matters for a free-enterprise economy. Monetary policy is not a neutral technocratic exercise. Interest rates are prices: the price of time, risk, and capital. When insulated officials tinker with those prices at their discretion, the result is distorted market signals. Cheap credit can mislead investors, encourage unsustainable projects, and redistribute wealth in opaque ways. Independence does not eliminate politics. It simply hides politics behind a veil of expertise.

If the economic case for independence is overstated, the constitutional case is entirely bunk. The Constitution is clear: Congress holds the power “to coin Money” and “regulate the Value thereof.” Monetary authority, like all legislative power, originates with the people’s representatives. Congress may delegate certain functions to administrative bodies, including by creating a central bank. But delegation is not abdication.

Those who exercise delegated authority remain accountable to the laws Congress passes and, ultimately, to the chief executive charged with enforcing them.

Yet the modern Fed operates as if our constitutional framework were irrelevant. Its leaders enjoy significant protection from removal. Its decisions (targeting interest rates, allocating credit, regulating banks, etc.) have sweeping consequences for the entire economy. If this does not constitute the exercise of executive power, it is hard to say what does.

The Supreme Court has recently emphasized that administrative agencies cannot be insulated from presidential oversight simply because they possess technical expertise. The separation of powers does not yield to convenience, nor to the promise of better policy outcomes. Yet when it comes to the Federal Reserve, the court has signaled a willingness to tolerate precisely such insulation — a “special case” for the most powerful economic institution in the country.

This exception is indefensible. Appeals to history or prudence, however well grounded, are not constitutional arguments. An agency that wields executive power must answer to the chief executive. Concerns about how that works in practice does not justify ignoring the Constitution.

The truth is that central bank independence persists not because it is firmly grounded in law or economics, but because the alternative unsettles us. We worry, not without reason, that elected officials might misuse monetary policy for short-term gain.

But the Constitution does not permit us to resolve that fear by concentrating vast economic power in the hands of unaccountable experts. A free and self-governing people must confront the difficult task of designing institutions that combine competence with accountability.

RELATED: If Congress can’t oversee the FBI, who can?

Daniel Heuer/Bloomberg/Getty Images

That begins with Congress. There are several legislative reforms that can restore the rule of law to monetary policy. First, lawmakers should narrow the Federal Reserve’s mandate to a single, clear objective — price stability — rather than the vague and conflicting goals it currently pursues. A simpler mandate would make it easier to evaluate performance and hold policymakers responsible when they fail.

Second, Congress should revisit the legal protections that shield senior Fed officials from removal. Freedom of judgment is one thing; freedom from oversight is another. Officials entrusted with such consequential authority must ultimately answer to elected leadership. Legislators ought to make it easier to fire central bankers.

Finally, the president should take a more active role in ensuring that the Fed operates within its statutory and constitutional bounds. This does not mean dictating day-to-day interest rate decisions. Instead, it means recognizing that monetary policy, like all exercises of government power, must remain subject to democratic control.

President Trump’s nomination of Kevin Warsh as the next Fed chairman is a good start. The two must work together to restore the Fed’s ordinary day-to-day operations, something missing since the 2007-08 financial crisis.

Economic stability is obviously desirable. But we cannot purchase it at the cost of self-government. Republican principles require officials to be answerable to the people. If we are serious about preserving the constitutional order and free enterprise, we must abandon the comforting myths of central bank independence and restore accountability to the Federal Reserve.

Editor’s note: This article appeared originally at the American Mind.

I’m Not Mad The Fed Renovation Costs Billions, I’m Mad That It’s Ugly

If we're going to build palaces for our bureaucrats, can they at least be pretty?

Trump Admin Is Legally Required To Shut Down The CFPB

The decision marks a turning point for the administrative state and the end of an era for self-funding, self-governing agencies.

Powell’s tight money policy is strangling the US economy



Two days after Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell announced the central bank’s decision not to reduce interest rates, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported scathingly bad news about the U.S. economy.

Employers added much fewer jobs than expected in July, revised numbers showed that employment and hiring were weak in May and June, and the unemployment rate ticked up again in July, reaching 4.2%.

Powell and the Fed have been doing their best to stunt economic growth — and they are succeeding.

Although Powell refuses to admit it, the Fed’s tight money policy is crushing economic growth.

In an impressive “Dewey Defeats Truman” moment, Powell said on Wednesday that the Fed was not ready to lower interest rates, citing low unemployment and inflation slightly above the Fed’s stated goal of 2%. Despite the Fed having lowered its target interest rate three times last fall to its current level — even though inflation remained “somewhat elevated” at the time, as the Fed put it — the Fed seems to have changed its tune under the Trump administration.

Friday’s numbers destroyed Powell’s explanation. The 73,000 new jobs in July were far below the 110,000 that economists had expected. In addition, the Bureau of Labor Statistics cut the reported job-creation totals for May and June from a healthy 291,000 to a dismal 33,000.

The economy has clearly been wobbly since January 2021 brought the tax-spend-borrow strategy that created the Biden-era fiscal disaster. The Fed caused the 2020s inflation by monetizing the Biden administration’s massive, irresponsible increase in the federal deficit and debt; boosting the money supply by 12.3% from January 2021 to April 2022; and holding the Fed funds rate around 0.08% until March 18, 2022, when the Fed raised it to a meager 0.33%.

The Fed’s target interest rate is now 4.33%, much higher than it has been at any other time in the 2000s except for the run-up to the Great Recession of 2008.

Punting responsibility

The central bank watched inflation soar during the Biden administration and wants to ensure that it does not recur. The Fed has used high interest rates and asset sales to tighten the money supply for three years now. Recent money supply growth has been lower than normal.

The federal budget has stabilized now, however, surprisingly running a slight surplus in June, which is relieving the main source of inflationary pressure. The surplus will undoubtedly prove temporary, but the lower-deficit trend will persist as long as economic growth continues and Congress does not increase spending any further: A growing economy provides greater tax revenues.

Powell is scuttling that plan by keeping interest rates too high. Instead of taking responsibility for the lingering effects of his inflationary Biden-assistance plan, Powell has been blaming tariffs and workers for the current slightly elevated inflation.

The Federal Reserve consistently sees low unemployment as bad news, assuming that it will bring on price inflation as workers demand higher wages, emboldened by a reduced fear of being stuck without a job. In addition, Powell argues that tariffs will increase inflation.

Both those notions ignore the simple fact that inflation is a general rise in prices, not price increases in specific sectors of the economy. If tariffs cause the prices of imported goods and some business inputs to rise, prices of other things must fall, unless someone increases the overall money supply — and that would have to be the Fed itself.

Similarly, if wages rise, it must be because productivity is increasing, or businesses would not be able to afford to pay higher wages — unless somebody increases the overall money supply, which again points to the Fed.

If businesses decide to pay the higher wages, even if output per worker is not rising and consumers continue to buy those items at the same rate, prices of other things must fall. Less money available for purchasing or investing in those other things means lower prices — unless the central bank increases the money supply.

Stalling Trump’s progress

Try as he might, Powell cannot exonerate the Fed for the struggles with inflation.

President Trump and congressional Republicans have rolled back the worst of the pandemic- and Biden-era fiscal and regulatory mayhem in addition to the sky-high inflation under the Biden-Harris administration — and the results are beginning to show. The U.S. economy grew at an unexpectedly strong 3% annual rate in the second quarter, a clear, positive response to the tax cut extension and major deregulation over the past six months.

The recent extension of the 2017 tax cuts and the Trump administration’s rapid action to deregulate industry and energy will go far in reviving the economy, if given a chance. Unfortunately, the Fed seems determined to thwart a full recovery.

RELATED: Fed Chair Powell defies Trump, keeps interest rates unchanged despite good economic reports

Photo by Chip Somodevilla / Staff via Getty Images

“You do not see weakening in the labor market,” Powell said in his Wednesday press conference, two days before the Bureau of Labor Statistics documented that very weakness.

“Demand for workers is slowing, but so is the supply. … Wages are gradually cooling,” he continued.

We now know why wages have been cooling while the jobs market was strong: The jobs market was not strong. Powell and the Fed have been doing their best to stunt economic growth — and they are succeeding.

Stop the squeeze

All of this suggests that the Fed should reduce interest rates — gradually and with a keen eye monitoring the situation — to give the economy room to expand and take advantage of somewhat-improved federal fiscal, regulatory, and energy policies.

In addition, continuing the slow reduction of the central bank’s balance sheet, which the Fed’s governors nearly doubled in 2009 and foolishly ballooned during the second Obama administration and the pandemic, would continue to provide a brake on inflation without unduly stunting economic growth.

Though federal fiscal policy still needs serious reform — through substantial cuts in spending — squeezing the economy with tight money is certainly not the solution to our economic problems.

Government broke the housing market — only this will fix it



If you’re frustrated with being unable to buy a home today, you’re not alone. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, homeownership affordability has been near an all-time low since 2023. The deadly combination of both home prices and interest rates skyrocketing broke the housing market, but simply lowering interest rates today won’t fix it.

To understand why, it’s important to know what caused this housing affordability crisis. Over the last several years, the federal government spent trillions of dollars it didn’t have in the world’s largest-ever borrowing binge. The money came from the Federal Reserve, which created those trillions of dollars out of nothing, depressing interest rates.

The real solution is not to manipulate rates lower and spawn further inflation, but to get government out of the way so interest rates can come down naturally.

The predictable result was a rapid devaluation of the dollar, manifesting as 40-year-high inflation, followed by the fastest rise in interest rates in just as long to cool off the inflation.

Rates aren’t the problem

Not only did home prices become stratospherically high relative to incomes, but financing costs became prohibitively expensive. Consequently, during the four years of the Biden administration, the monthly mortgage payment doubled on a median-priced home.

For the housing market, this was a one-two punch that cratered affordability and consigned millions of Americans to renting for the foreseeable future.

The Fed’s artificially low interest rates helped cause the problem in the first place. Home prices rose not only because the dollar lost value (taking more dollars to buy the same home), but also because lower interest rates meant potential home buyers could borrow more and bid up the price of homes.

What’s most important to someone when considering buying a home is not the home’s price but the monthly mortgage payment. While the payment is clearly dependent on the whole price, interest rates are also a major factor. When those rates fell below 3%, people were willing to spend much more on the same home because the monthly payment didn’t change much.

As the months passed, however, and the bidding wars continued, prices just kept rising. Once interest rates returned to more normal levels, everything fell apart as monthly mortgage payments exploded. It now takes over two-thirds of the median household’s take-home pay to afford a median-priced home.

Historically, when interest rates rise, home prices fall, but that didn’t happen this time. So many people locked in home loans at interest rates below 4% — or even below 3% — that they can’t sell their homes today, because doing so would mean losing that interest rate and getting a new mortgage at 7%, 8%, or 9%.

The only way to make the math work is if homeowners sell at a huge premium, giving a massive down payment on their next home, minimizing the amount borrowed at a higher rate, and therefore preventing their monthly payment from skyrocketing. The large and fast increases in interest rates pushed home prices even higher instead of lower.

Get government out of the way

The temptation today is for the Fed to simply lower the federal funds rate (its benchmark interest rate), under the assumption that such a move will push down interest rates throughout the economy, including mortgages. Sadly, instead of fixing the broken housing market, it would likely have the opposite effect.

Last autumn, in a move that could only be described as blatant election interference, the federal funds rate was reduced when there was no empirical justification for doing so. But the move buoyed stock prices. Market participants saw through the charade and realized the artificially low rates would ultimately lead to more inflation, which prompted private market interest rates to rise.

RELATED: Trump rips into Fed Chair Jerome Powell for not lowering interest rates and suggests he'll be fired soon

Photo by e-crow via Getty Images

Lenders don’t like inflation because it reduces the value of the money being repaid in the future. To compensate, creditors demand a higher rate of return. That’s why the yield on Treasury debt at the end of last year jumped 100 basis points after the federal funds rate fell 100 basis points, demonstrating the Sisyphean nature of the problem.

Additionally, interest rates and home prices have recoupled. If interest rates fall one or even two percentage points, that will again prompt potential home buyers to borrow more, thereby bidding up home prices again. Unless rates drop substantially more, existing homeowners will remain trapped by the golden handcuffs of their 2% or 3% interest rates.

The real solution is not to manipulate rates lower and spawn further inflation, but to get government out of the way so those rates can come down naturally. If the government spent much less, then there would be less demand for borrowed money. Reducing demand in turn reduces the price, and the price for borrowed money is the interest rate.

Profligate government spending broke the housing market. Only fiscal restraint at the federal level will fix the problem.

Vought slams Fed Chair Powell over 'grossly mismanaged' luxury renovations



In his latest crusade to rein in spending, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought has set his sights on the Federal Reserve.

Vought called out Chairman Jerome Powell for greenlighting luxury renovations to the Fed's Washington, D.C., headquarters that exceeded the original budget by roughly $700 million, totaling roughly $2.5 billion. The renovations include a rooftop terrace with gardens, VIP dining rooms and elevators, "premium" marble, and water features.

"The president is extremely troubled by your management of the Federal Reserve System," Vought said in a statement. "Instead of attempting to right the Fed's fiscal ship, you have plowed ahead with an ostentatious overhaul of your Washington, D.C., headquarters."

"The cost per square foot is $1,923 — double the cost for renovating an ordinary historic federal building," Vought added. "The Palace of Versailles would have cost $3 billion in today's dollars!"

'Chairman Jerome Powell has grossly mismanaged the Fed.'

RELATED: Russ Vought gives Glenn Beck hint about where things stand between Trump and Musk

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

Vought also pointed to Powell's congressional testimony in June, where he denied that the lavish renovations were taking place. Vought said Powell's testimony "raises serious questions" about the renovation's compliance with the National Capital Planning Act, which would require the project to be approved by the National Capital Planning Commission.

"Although minor deviations from approved plans may be inevitable, your testimony appears to reveal that the project is out of compliance with the approved plan with regard to the major design elements," Vought said. "This would bring the project outside of the NCPC's approval and thus in violation of the NCPA, and require the Fed to immediately halt construction and obtain a new approval from the NCPC before proceeding any further."

RELATED: Exclusive: Trump 2026 budget to slash funds for migrant programs

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The renovations were originally approved by the NCPC in September 2021 and featured plans to include the luxurious water features, terrace gardens, VIP elevators, and private dining rooms.

During the hearing, however, Powell insisted that these renovations were not taking place despite no changes being made to the original project.

“There’s no VIP dining room. There’s no new marble. There are no special elevators,” Powell said during the hearing. “There are no new water features, there’s no beehives, and there’s no roof terrace gardens.”

Powell claimed that the construction plans previously approved in 2021 have since changed. Despite his claim, the Fed would not be able to change these plans without formally submitting the modifications to the NCPC and the Commission of Fine Arts. According to the NCPC's website, the latest approval for the project was submitted in September 2021, and there have been no new requests filed since then.

Because of these discrepancies, Vought said OMB will be conducting further oversight on the project.

"Chairman Jerome Powell has grossly mismanaged the Fed."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Someone in the United States is buying MASSIVE amounts of gold. What’s going on?



“There's something going on with gold, and nobody really knows what it is,” says Glenn Beck, pointing to the following “must-read” tweet thread from Matt Smith:

— (@)

“Somebody here in the United States is buying a crapload of gold. We think (I hope) it’s the Treasury or the Central Bank,” he says.

Whoever is behind the purchases — “somebody with very deep pockets” — isn’t just collecting gold notes, either.

Whoever this mysterious somebody is, they’re “taking huge physical deliveries, and it's causing shortages in London,” says Glenn.

What on Earth is going on?

Glenn dives into two potential outcomes.

Outcome #1: Trump returns the US dollar to the gold standard

It’s possible that “they're preparing for a full-on gold audit,” says Glenn, noting thaton the government's balance sheet, its gold assets are “valued at $45 an ounce.”

However, the true value of gold as of now is actually “$2900 an ounce.”

“So they're talking now about boosting the price of gold, at least market to market, but maybe even making it $5,000 an ounce. If that happens, the balance sheet starts to fall into line and our debt to GDP is not as bad as it really is right now,” Glenn explains.

“We're coming to a place where we’re not going to be able to finance the debt,” he says. This effort to “reshore up our balance sheet and make ourselves healthier” is “because we're at the end of the dollar. We're at the end of this financial system.”

“So this is an endgame. It’s why tariffs are being brought in,” which will “cause inflation to rise,” Glenn says.

“If [tariffs] are not done exactly right,” the average person will be “punished with higher prices.” However, Donald Trump “is betting that wages will also rise because he's forcing people to keep their profits here and make jobs here.”

“If everything goes right, what the trade on gold is showing us is that we may be going towards a gold-backed financial system or a gold-backed currency of some sort,” says Glenn, adding that “the FED could even be shut down.”

He then explains that “the dollar could be, by design, being collapsed.”

“That's exactly what the Biden administration was doing ... but they didn't have a plan to replace it other than a digital dollar and global slavery. I'm not sure what the plan is here, but it seems much more American-centric — good for America and eventually good for the rest of the world,” says Glenn.

Outcome #2: Nobody owns anything

He then points back to Smith’s X thread — specifically to the part where he suggests that “they’re reshoring the gold that might have been leased out.”

“That’s rehypothecation” says Glenn, warning his listeners that they need to watch carefully for this word in the coming days.

Rehypothecation, he explains, is when “we've taken one asset and we've counted it on several different accounting books.”

If this happens, that means “no one owns anything,” says Glenn, calling it “a Ponzi scheme.”

To hear his advice for the everyday American, watch the clip above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Can America survive another four years of Bidenomics?



While the Biden administration claims it has everything under control, inflation continues to rise, housing prices are insane, and the government just keeps spending.

“The United States government is printing one trillion dollars every 100 days,” Glenn Beck says, adding, “Just put that in your pipe and smoke it for a minute.”

And the American people are suffering, despite attempts at raising wages to deal with inflation — like they’ve done in California.

“$20 minimum wage for fast-food workers,” Glenn says, adding, “Kind of putting people out of business. First of all, McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King, hiked prices to offset the higher cost. Who would have seen that coming?”

“How many times does it take before people understand basic economics? The price of the goods or service goes up when it costs the company that is providing those goods or services, when it costs them more to get that to you, they raise the price. That’s the way business works,” Glenn explains.

“This is what every business is going through right now,” he adds.

The economy is so disastrous under Biden, that Glenn believes if he wins the 2024 election, it will be a sign of something far more ominous than just rising prices.

“I will be absolutely convinced that this is a fraudulent election if for the first time in history, the economy doesn’t play a major role,” he says. “Can America survive another four years? Can you survive another four years going down this road? Can you afford it?”

As the prices continue to go up, the chances Americans have at owning basic necessities will continue to go down.

“You’re not able to buy a house, you’re not able to get a loan on anything that is reasonable, and it is only going to get much, much, worse,” Glenn warns.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Massie and other Republicans push the 'Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act'



GOP Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and more than a dozen other House Republicans are pushing a measure that targets the Federal Reserve System. The measure includes text that declares, "The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and each Federal reserve bank are hereby abolished" and "the Federal Reserve Act is hereby repealed."

Massie announced the introduction of the measure on Thursday, the same day that the Dow Jones Industrial Average stock index surpassed 40,000 for the first time before ultimately giving up its gains and closing slightly down for the day.

'If we really want to reduce inflation, the most effective policy is to end the Federal Reserve.'

"Americans are suffering under crippling inflation, and the Federal Reserve is to blame," Massie said, according to a press release. "During COVID, the Federal Reserve created trillions of dollars out of thin air and loaned it to the Treasury Department to enable unprecedented deficit spending. By monetizing the debt, the Federal Reserve devalued the dollar and enabled free money policies that caused the high inflation we see today."

"Monetizing debt is a closely coordinated effort between the White House, Federal Reserve, Treasury Department, Congress, Big Banks, and Wall Street," the congressman noted, according to the press release. "Through this process, retirees see their savings evaporate due to the actions of a central bank pursuing inflationary policies that benefit the wealthy and connected. If we really want to reduce inflation, the most effective policy is to end the Federal Reserve."

According to the press release, original cosponsors on the measure include GOP Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Tim Burchett of Tennessee, Eric Burlison of Missouri, Kat Cammack of Florida, Michael Cloud of Texas, Eli Crane of Arizona, Jeff Duncan of South Carolina, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Bob Good of Virginia, Paul Gosar of Arizona, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Harriet Hageman of Wyoming, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Chip Roy of Texas, Keith Self of Texas, Victoria Spartz of Indiana, and Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin.

"The Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act was first introduced by former Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) in 1999 and hasn't been reintroduced since 2013," the press release states.

Paul introduced the Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act numerous times, and in 2013, then-Rep. Paul Broun, a Georgia Republican, introduced the measure.

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Why The Federal Reserve Should Keep Its Grubby Mitts Off The Mortgage Market

It's highly unlikely that the solution to a problem caused in part by poor Federal Reserve policy can come via yet another policy intervention by Fed officials.