Esther George

Well, they could, and you're going to have people argue for that, for sure.

But I also think the committee will have to wrestle with the narrative of the labor market signs of weakening.

And that was the beginning of their rate cut.

So the chairmen put the markets on notice, not to presume that that cut is coming.

On the other hand, if the data, however informal, however pieced together it might be, does not change that narrative, they could be inclined to continue that cutting cycle.

Well, not necessarily, Lisa.

And the reason I think that is because I think this throws another log of uncertainty onto the fire.

If the federal government has to do something different with those tariffs, that then raises the prospect of where do we find that happening?

Will it be sectorial?

Is it going to be in terms of lowering revenues immediately or in the long term?

It is another, I think, reminder of why it is so important for policymakers, not at the Fed, but policymakers that are thinking about our fiscal situation to really begin to be more forward-looking about what we face as a way to lay a foundation for future economic growth.

Because right now, we're in a bit of a soup that isn't providing the kind of foundation that I think we need.

Yeah, well, good afternoon.

I think clearly this is another step in an ongoing pressure and attack on the institution in terms of the authorities of the executive branch relative to the Federal Reserve.

And so however this plays out in terms of the details of the specific case that's been brought forward, I think what's at stake here for the American public is really to understand who will be influential in the decisions that the Federal Reserve makes in the years to come.

Well, I think it would be very concerning, and I'll tell you why, Scarlett.

If you think about the origins of this institution, they were firmly anchored in making sure that political pressure would be as limited as possible in terms of the critical decisions

that the Federal Open Market Committee has to make for the long run.

And so the idea that you would structure the institution in a way that would protect that long run view and not drive it in the direction of short run decisions was critical.

And it proved to be relatively durable over the last 100 plus years.