Stephen Miran, President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Federal Reserve Board, announced during his Senate confirmation hearing that he plans to maintain his role as chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers even if confirmed to the Fed. This decision has sparked significant debate over the independence of the central bank, with Democrats expressing alarm and Republicans offering cautious support.
At the hearing before the Senate Banking Committee on Thursday, Miran, who is currently the chief of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers, stated that he would take an unpaid leave of absence from his White House position rather than resign, citing the short-term nature of the Fed appointment which expires in January. He assured senators that he would act independently in his Fed role, but his commitment to retaining ties to the administration raised immediate concerns among lawmakers about potential conflicts of interest.
Democratic senators, led by Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, vehemently opposed Miran’s dual role, arguing that it compromises the Fed’s independence. Warren accused Miran of being a ‘puppet’ for Trump and warned that such a move could undermine economic stability by eroding trust in the central bank. Other Democrats, like Jack Reed of Rhode Island, called the arrangement ‘ridiculous’ and questioned Miran’s motives for seeking a temporary position while keeping his White House job, suggesting it indicated a lack of commitment to Fed independence.
Republicans, while acknowledging the importance of Fed independence, largely indicated they would support Miran’s confirmation. Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana urged Miran to ignore political rhetoric and make decisions based solely on economic data, emphasizing the need for impartiality. However, the GOP’s willingness to advance the nomination reflects the broader political dynamics under Trump’s presidency, where loyalty to the administration often takes precedence over traditional norms.
The controversy occurs amid Trump’s ongoing efforts to exert influence over the Federal Reserve, including pressuring Fed Chair Jerome Powell to lower interest rates and attempting to fire another governor, Lisa Cook, over allegations she denies. Economists warn that such political interference could damage the Fed’s credibility, potentially leading to economic instability and harming the U.S. economy’s global standing. The Fed’s mandate to maintain price stability and maximize employment relies on its perceived independence from political sway.
Miran’s background includes training as an economist at Harvard and previous writings that suggest support for greater presidential control over the Fed. In a 2024 paper, he argued for Fed board members to serve at the president’s will, though he also recommended against serving in the executive branch immediately after their term, a stance seemingly contradicted by his current plans. This inconsistency has fueled doubts about his ability to uphold Fed independence in practice.
If confirmed, Miran’s tenure would be brief, ending in January, but the precedent set could have long-term implications for Fed independence. The Senate is expected to vote on his nomination soon, with Republicans holding the majority. The outcome will signal how much political influence is tolerated in monetary policy decisions, potentially affecting global markets and national economic health for years to come.