/ 13 September 1996

How the Fed helped the US

With Alan Greenspan changing his views on inflation, a split in the Federal Reserve may be a possibility, reports Mark Tran in New York

It is time to reassess Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan’s image as a party pooper. The usual view of Greenspan is that of an anti-inflation hawk, quick to tighten and slow to loosen monetary policy.

But this year, it is Greenspan who has been fighting off the anti-inflation hawks, who have been arguing for a rise in interest rates as the economy continues to show unexpected strength. The August unemployment rate of 5,1%, the lowest in seven years, and the creation of 250 000 jobs, showed plenty of life in an economic expansion that has lasted a remarkably long time — 66 months.

The markets did not tumble. Still, the August jobs report will strengthen the hand of the inflation hawks when the Fed meets this month.

Reports are rife of a split at the Fed, with Greenspan and the other six members of the bank’s board of governors willing to test the theory that structural changes in the economy allow for a less restrictive monetary approach. According to this argument, the danger of cost-push inflation has receded because of workers’ insecurity and the weakness of the unions. Demand-pull inflation has stayed low because prices have stayed low.

This group also believes that big investments in computers have boosted productivity, especially in the service industry where productivity gains are notoriously difficult to measure, allowing the economy to grow faster for the time being without stoking inflation.

The traditionalists — most of the 12 regional Fed bank presidents — do not believe that the world has changed that much. They see evidence of labour shortages, consumer confidence at record levels and strong growth in spending eventually leading to higher inflation.

Although the Fed’s Open Market Committee decided in July and August to leave rates unchanged at 5,25%, the pressure is increasing on Greenspan to revert to his policy of pre-emptive strikes against inflation.

This makes it virtually certain that the Fed will move to raise rates by at least 25 basis points, maybe even 50 basis points, this month, despite the traditional reluctance of the central bank to act so close to a presidential election.

But the administration has little to worry about. Effects of tightening will not take hold for about six months, by which time President Bill Clinton probably still will be in the Oval Office, getting to grips with the fallout of the welfare bill and the huge entitlement programmes that have put the United States on a course to financial calamity.

Clinton has been quick to claim credit for America’s good economic fortune, although most economists think Greenspan deserves most of the acclaim. But the president has done his share. His 1993 Budget package, helped by economic growth, cut the deficit by 60%, from $290-billion to $116-billion. The two have forged an economic partnership that has served the US well.

If Clinton is re-elected — and victory looks increasingly probable given Bob Dole’s failure to make any impression so far — it will be interesting to see what he does with the country’s big entitlement programmes, Social Security and Medicare.

And he will certainly want to go down in the history books as the man who finally cut the Gordian knot on America’s most intractable political and economic challenge. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently projected that paying for Social Security and Medicare in their present form would require a tax increase of almost a third by the year 2030.

The only way to avoid much higher taxes, the CBO said, would be a mix of raising the retirement age and reducing benefits for the better-off as well as raising taxes. It would take enormous political skills to assemble such a package, but it would be a challenge worthy of Clinton’s political talents.

Greenspan has long argued the case for bringing down the Budget deficit, lowering taxes, and investing more in education and training. He can be expected to provide discreet prodding for the winner in November to tackle the entitlements challenge, while pursuing his goal of keeping the economy chugging at or near full employment without inflation.