Earlier in the week I argued that Boxer isn’t Coakley, and that if she took a strong populist stand against the banks, she would help strengthen her position even more as we enter the campaign cycle.
Sure enough, Boxer is already moving down that very path, announcing her opposition to Ben Bernanke’s reconfirmation as Federal Reserve chair:
I have a lot of respect for Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. When the financial crisis hit in late 2008, he took some important steps to prevent what many economists believe could have been an even greater economic catastrophe.
However, it is time for a change – it is time for Main Street to have a champion at the Fed. Dr. Bernanke played a lead role in crafting the Bush administration’s economic policies, which led to the current economic crisis. Our next Federal Reserve Chairman must represent a clean break from the failed policies of the past.
This is exactly the right messaging to use at exactly the right moment. Already Boxer’s move is being hailed as being a possible backbreaker for the Bernanke nomination, showing that Boxer has the right political instincts and timing, as well as the right policy. She was joined later in the day by Russ Feingold.
Calitics alum David Dayen argues this is a crucial turning point in policy toward the banks:
We’re seeing a tectonic shift here in the balance of power in the White House and in Congress. Obama’s release of the Volcker proposal to limit bank size clearly moved power away from Tim Geithner and Larry Summers. That Geithner is leaking out his opposition, and making the arguments of the bank lobby in doing so, shows this pretty explicitly.
It’s very good to see Boxer taking leadership on these issues, especially as the White House “fails to rise to the occasion”, in Paul Krugman’s damning words.
Senator ‘I luv me Some Joey’ Boxer is worried about you and your bank account.
When pigs fly pals.
She is one of the problems, along with the criminal DiFi, in this Congress. War-Monger, Bomber supporter and now she’s and expert on finance.
I doubt that, me.
‘Helicopter’ Ben is one of the few technocrats in D.C. who knows his job and did it well during the meltdown. The Fed is independent for a reason or two. One of which is to remove it from political influence or would you rather have interest rates and money policy set by the folks who are bringing you ‘health care reform’.
I think not.
Boxer and her ilk are the one’s who need to go. Eight years of the BushWhacker getting any and every screwed up policy he felt like implemented with a minority of Senators and now we’re told if Boxer can take Ben’s scalp all will be well?
Well it won’t and the sooner we real progressives wake the hell up the better…..
Whether one likes Senator Boxer or not (I happen to like her more than dislike her — a mixed bag of feelings about her here), she is doing the right think in wanting Chairman Bernanke out. And President Obama is doing the right thing in finally wanting to break up the big financial firms.
Next Geithner and Summers need to go.
The financial community’s old boy network simply needs to be broken up. And then we need to “Teddy Roosevelt” the firms themselves.
Maybe, just maybe, the Democrats learned something from Massachusetts. The country is not really angry about the health care bill. We are angry that those who created the problem we all now face have yet to be held accountable — and the Democrats have appeared to be either unwilling or unable to do so.