Fed officials split on policy, united on default danger

ST LOUIS/ BOISE, Idaho Thu Oct 10, 2013 5:55pm EDT

1 of 5. U.S. President Barack Obama (R) announces his nomination of Janet Yellen to head the Federal Reserve, at the White House in Washington October 9, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

ST LOUIS/ BOISE, Idaho (Reuters) - While officials of the Federal Reserve have sparred over whether the U.S. central bank should continue full-bore with its massive bond-buying stimulus, two Fed officials with differing policy views agreed on Thursday that a national debt default could have devastating effects.

Budget gridlock at the U.S. Congress led to an October 1 partial government shutdown that threatens to hurt economic growth and has already delayed the release of key economic data such as the September jobs report. Lawmakers are now locked in debate over how to raise the government's borrowing limit and avoid a U.S. debt default on October 17.

John Williams, the president of the San Francisco Fed and a policy centrist, on Thursday said politicians in Washington are playing a "very, very dangerous game" with their brinkmanship, and said the failure of the government to pay its bills could undermine world confidence in the U.S. dollar, and in the extreme could cause a global financial panic.

St. Louis Fed President James Bullard also had strong words for Congress.

"It's just imperative that we do not go in this direction and get into a situation where we're not paying some of our bills," Bullard said, noting the U.S. dollar is the world's reserve currency and the United States is seen as a safe-haven investment.

"There's no reason to let a self-inflicted wound put that at risk," he said. "We want to protect our international reputation ... and get this thing done."

On policy, though, the two officials staked out differing views that mirrored the split at the Fed's policy-setting panel as a whole.

Bullard, who is a voting member of the policy-setting panel this year and who supported last month's shock decision to keep the bond-buying program at its current level, said fiscal problems in Washington have "changed the odds" on whether the central bank will reduce the bond-buying program at its upcoming meeting on October 29-30.

Last month "we cited that fiscal uncertainty was a risk and that risk has materialized, so I think that's making it less likely than would otherwise be that we make a decision to taper in October," Bullard told reporters on the sidelines of a conference hosted by the St. Louis Fed, adding that the debt-ceiling debate also plays a big role.

He said he has not made up his mind and didn't want to pre-judge the October meeting, though he added that the Fed can be patient with its quantitative easing program until inflation rises closer to the Fed's 2 percent target.

The San Francisco Fed's Williams, who is viewed as a policy centrist and who does not have a vote on policy this year, said he would have been open to reducing the Fed's $85 billion-a-month in bond purchases at last month's meeting.

"I personally wasn't as far away from being willing to initiate a small taper" compared with some other top Fed officials, Williams told reporters.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said in June the Fed would probably reduce its bond purchases later this year and end the purchases by mid-2014.

A decision on when to taper and end the program will hinge on the momentum in the economy, Williams said. When the time comes, he said, investors should expect the Fed to scale back bond-buying slowly.

"This won't be a slamming on the brakes, it will be an easing off the gas," he told a group of business leaders and politicians at Boise State University.

Williams, however, did not suggest that the budget debates would necessarily mean the Fed should hold off on tapering. If they do result in a new round of fiscal austerity next year, he said, the Fed may have to keep policy super-easy for longer than currently anticipated.

"We'll have to watch. I don't want to speculate on what Congress and the president are going to decide. What they decide obviously does frame the economic outlook and obviously that frames the policy outlook too," he said.

"I would hope that Congress and the politicians would come to agreements that would last longer than six weeks, to add a little bit more certainty to the environment."

(Reporting by Ann Saphir in Boise, Idaho, and Jonathan Spicer in St. Louis; Editing by Leslie Adler)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
What is the reality of the continuing tax revenue collection – relative to ‘projections?’ Does the reality exceed the ‘projections?’ Is there a factual bill-paying “problem?”

In the worst-case scenario, no one is taking the position that America’s bond payments are in danger. Comparably, political propaganda aside, there is no “evidence” that an increase in the debt-ceiling is an overwhelming mandate.

Relative to the current budget battle, “Obamacare” isn’t a “law;” it’s Obama’s illegally pencil-whipped substitute “program” for the “Affordable Care Act.” The House of Representatives (all parties) can’t legitimately fund “Obamacare;” if they wanted to.

How and why has that reality escaped so many within just the Beltway – add the “news media?”

The House/Boehner has the perfect “silver bullet;” requiring only a squeeze of the political trigger. Why don’t they take the proverbial “shot?” It’s free.

Let’s get past this absurd “budget” battle – the solution is amazingly “easy.” The issue of the debt-ceiling desperately needs attentive examination and resolution.

Oct 10, 2013 8:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
wesatch wrote:
These Fed folks are worse then the politicians they criticize. They sit in an ivory tower spouting bs economics in every capital in the world they can a free plane ride to and a champagne lobster brunch while screwing savers and retirees out of the value of their savings and retirement money.

How does a 90 year old make up the $10,000 a year in foregone interest received in 2007? Go long in stocks. Not a chance. But instead, use up their nest egg’s principle so folks like Bullard and Yellen and Bernanke can run around the world and never miss a payday and lard up their bud’s at made up banks like GE and Amex with free $$.

What the hell has happened to the U.S.???? Wall Street and lobbyists, that’s what!

Do you realize how much disposable income the fed has removed from bank account and money market account holders?? About 2/3 of a trillion dollars for 6 years. Money that would have fueled a recovery instead of cheap $$ mergers and stock buybacks to prop up their buddies options.

Wake up America.

Oct 10, 2013 9:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bugzy wrote:
Any FOMC member must have experience of working at McDonalds or must have lived on average salary before opening their stinking mouth and say inflation is too low. I think the FED is evil for their denials about their actions. The GOP should take the fight to the FED because the QE is only for stock and forex trading. You can’t manufacture growth with untrusted excess money, you can’t create real jobs with excess money. The banks use the money from FED to gamble because creating jobs is boring. Please check out the number of lay-offs in banking since 08. Blackberry couldn’t use excess cash to grow, once the fundamentals are wrong it will only take time to admit that there really is a problem.

Oct 10, 2013 12:40am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

Recommended Newsletters

Reuters U.S. Top News
A quick-fix on the day's news published with Reuters videos and award-winning news photography and delivered at your choice of one of four times during the day.
Reuters Deals Today
The latest Reuters articles on M&A, IPOs, private equity, hedge funds and regulatory updates delivered to your inbox each day.
Reuters Technology Report
Your daily briefing on the latest tech developments from around the world from Reuters expert tech correspondents.