Taming Politicians on Both Sides of the Atlantic

Despite occasional grumbles from politicians, no one seriously doubts the European Central Bank's independence, or that monetary policy within the euro zone is therefore well insulated from political pressures. But the recent death of the Stability and Growth Pact-killed off by Germany, its father, with France acting as co-conspirator and willing accomplice-reminds us of a key lesson: elected politicians find it hard, if not impossible, to relinquish substantial power in the area of fiscal policy.

The same is true across the Atlantic. The US Federal Reserve Board is, of course, very independent. But any attempt to limit the fiscal discretion of America's Federal government in the manner of the Stability Pact-for example, the infamous Gramm/Rudman rules of the Clinton era-always collapse in the end in the face of presidential and congressional pressure.

Monetary policy can be used to stimulate an economy just as much as fiscal policy, if not more, in election years, which politicians will always want to do. But reckless use of either mechanism for short-term goals may create long-term costs, justifying some restrictions on politicians' latitude in influencing macroeconomic policies.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

Registration is quick and easy and requires only your email address. If you already have an account with us, please log in. Or subscribe now for unlimited access.


Log in

  1. An employee works at a chemical fiber weaving company VCG/Getty Images

    China in the Lead?

    For four decades, China has achieved unprecedented economic growth under a centralized, authoritarian political system, far outpacing growth in the Western liberal democracies. So, is Chinese President Xi Jinping right to double down on authoritarianism, and is the “China model” truly a viable rival to Western-style democratic capitalism?

  2. The assembly line at Ford Bill Pugliano/Getty Images

    Whither the Multilateral Trading System?

    The global economy today is dominated by three major players – China, the EU, and the US – with roughly equal trading volumes and limited incentive to fight for the rules-based global trading system. With cooperation unlikely, the world should prepare itself for the erosion of the World Trade Organization.

  3. Donald Trump Saul Loeb/Getty Images

    The Globalization of Our Discontent

    Globalization, which was supposed to benefit developed and developing countries alike, is now reviled almost everywhere, as the political backlash in Europe and the US has shown. The challenge is to minimize the risk that the backlash will intensify, and that starts by understanding – and avoiding – past mistakes.

  4. A general view of the Corn Market in the City of Manchester Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

    A Better British Story

    Despite all of the doom and gloom over the United Kingdom's impending withdrawal from the European Union, key manufacturing indicators are at their highest levels in four years, and the mood for investment may be improving. While parts of the UK are certainly weakening economically, others may finally be overcoming longstanding challenges.

  5. UK supermarket Waring Abbott/Getty Images

    The UK’s Multilateral Trade Future

    With Brexit looming, the UK has no choice but to redesign its future trading relationships. As a major producer of sophisticated components, its long-term trade strategy should focus on gaining deep and unfettered access to integrated cross-border supply chains – and that means adopting a multilateral approach.

  6. The Year Ahead 2018

    The world’s leading thinkers and policymakers examine what’s come apart in the past year, and anticipate what will define the year ahead.

    Order now