Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hasn’t yet filed cloture (to limit debate and overcome a filibuster) on Ben Bernanke’s nomination for a second four-year term as Federal Reserve chairman, pushing a vote into next week at the earliest. Does that suggest anything about Bernanke’s prospects?
 |
| Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) leads the charge against Fed Chairman Bernanke. (Getty Images) |
Probably not, even if the delay might feed speculation on Capitol Hill and Wall Street. Given the Senate upheaval after the Republican victory in Massachusetts, the focus on scheduling a central bank nominee’s confirmation surely dropped a bit in the leadership office. But Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), who is leading the charge among liberals to fight the nomination, thinks the Massachusetts outcome will influence the Bernanke vote in another way. In a statement Wednesday, Sen. Sanders said he senses “growing opposition” to the nomination in light of the Massachusetts “wake-up call” for Democrats.
There is a growing understanding that our economy is in severe distress, a greater appreciation that people are disgusted with the never-ending greed on Wall Street, and a better recognition that we need a new direction at the Fed,” he said in his statement. People do not want another term for the man whose major job as Fed chairman was to protect the safety and soundness of our financial system but instead was asleep at the switch. I am confident that more and more senators understand that we need a new Fed and a new Wall Street and will oppose Bernankes confirmation.
Of course, Sanders is one of at least four lawmakers trying to block the Bernanke vote, so it’s not surprising that he’d want to build opposition. In an interview, he said he’s been talking with other senators and urging them to vote “no.” (In public, many Democrats have been noncommittal about how they’d vote.) Sanders said he’s heard from more Democrats in recent days who would vote against Bernanke, but he declined to name them. “You’re beginning to see, maybe this vote is kind of symbolic of one’s attitude toward Wall Street, and whether or not we’re going to stand up to them and move it in a new direction with new leadership, or whether we keep up the same old same old,” he said.
Would opponents actually have the 41 votes needed to block the Fed chairman for another term? The Fed chairman regulates many Wall Street firms, but this battle may come down to how many senators buy the argument that a mild-mannered former Princeton professor — who lawmakers routinely say they like personally — is really that closely linked to Wall Street.
If the full Senate votes in the same proportion that the Senate Banking Committee did in its 16-7 approval last month, Bernanke would receive at least 69 votes — nine more than he needs to clear under Senate rules. (That would be worse than Paul Volcker, who was confirmed 84-16 amid economic turmoil in 1983.) Even if he lost roughly two-thirds of the 41 Republicans on the Senate floor — more than the 60% he lost in committee — he’d still need to lose almost a quarter of Democrats to be defeated. All of that is not entirely inconceivable, but it would be surprising for a former Bush administration official who is the Democratic president’s nominee. (So far from the left, only Sanders and Sen. Jeff Merkley have indicated their plans to vote against Bernanke, while Sen. Byron Dorgan is also seen as a possible “no” vote.)
Sanders, when we walked through the math, acknowledged the odds. But he maintained that he has a shot at getting 15 Democrats. “It’s going to be close,” he said.