Why Larry Summers threw in the towel
It's too early to say for sure why Larry Summers decided to take himself off President Obama's list of possible contenders for Fed chair. He seems to have cut some sort of implicit deal with Obama years ago: He'd take a position that was beneath him, and when Ben Bernanke's term was up, Summers would easily be nominated. And not without warrant: Summers has all the right credentials.
It turns out that history has saddled with him several of the wrong credentials, too. Over time, and not too fairly, he's been blamed by a lot of powerful people for tilting Obama recovery plan toward the financial sector, and for fighting other appointments of more liberally inclined economists to other administration posts. But Obama had his back. (The recovery was always Obama's, and the books we've consumed so far suggest that Obama usually understood exactly the implications of some of the very complex technical decisions that his economists had to make.)
The proximate cause of his withdrawal is that the Senate confirmation hearing he would face would be turned into a review of the past, rather than focus on his ideas for the present. It would be "acrimonious," Summers acknowledged, which is putting it lightly. Quite simply, he'd face fire from both Democrats and Republicans, and at a time when the Obama administration is still struggling to convince businesses and consumers that the economy is recovering, all that heat would counter that message. I think such a review of past policy would be interesting and productive, but the White House obviously doesn't share my views.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
As POLITICO noted, a number of Democratic senators are circling on the anti-Summers bandwagon and have elections in 2014. The presence of an absolutely qualified and more politically palatable alternative, Janet Yellen, made their decision easier. Yellen will face fire from Republicans, and partisan fire, which Democratic senators will relish and gain momentum from. Our politics has taken a distinctively populist turn, even if only in tone, and Yellen better fits the moment. It is extraordinary that liberal pressure groups have exerted influence on the Fed chair process, but indeed they have. And perhaps it's a good thing: Not since Paul Volcker has the position been at the center of the debate about the way forward.
Summers is really smart. He understands this. He thinks it's bullshit. But he's not going to stand in the way of history.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Marc Ambinder is TheWeek.com's editor-at-large. He is the author, with D.B. Grady, of The Command and Deep State: Inside the Government Secrecy Industry. Marc is also a contributing editor for The Atlantic and GQ. Formerly, he served as White House correspondent for National Journal, chief political consultant for CBS News, and politics editor at The Atlantic. Marc is a 2001 graduate of Harvard. He is married to Michael Park, a corporate strategy consultant, and lives in Los Angeles.
-
'Underneath the noise, however, there’s an existential crisis'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
2024: the year of distrust in science
In the Spotlight Science and politics do not seem to mix
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
The Nutcracker: English National Ballet's reboot restores 'festive sparkle'
The Week Recommends Long-overdue revamp of Tchaikovsky's ballet is 'fun, cohesive and astoundingly pretty'
By Irenie Forshaw, The Week UK Published
-
The pros and cons of noncompete agreements
The Explainer The FTC wants to ban companies from binding their employees with noncompete agreements. Who would this benefit, and who would it hurt?
By Peter Weber Published
-
What experts are saying about the economy's surprise contraction
The Explainer The sharpest opinions on the debate from around the web
By Brendan Morrow Published
-
The death of cities was greatly exaggerated
The Explainer Why the pandemic predictions about urban flight were wrong
By David Faris Published
-
The housing crisis is here
The Explainer As the pandemic takes its toll, renters face eviction even as buyers are bidding higher
By The Week Staff Published
-
How to be an ally to marginalized coworkers
The Explainer Show up for your colleagues by showing that you see them and their struggles
By Tonya Russell Published
-
What the stock market knows
The Explainer Publicly traded companies are going to wallop small businesses
By Noah Millman Published
-
Can the government save small businesses?
The Explainer Many are fighting for a fair share of the coronavirus rescue package
By The Week Staff Published
-
How the oil crash could turn into a much bigger economic shock
The Explainer This could be a huge problem for the entire economy
By Jeff Spross Published