A Look At The Fed's Nest In 2014: Here Are Next Year's Voting Hawks And Doves

Tyler Durden's picture

With Janet Yellen now confirmed as Bernanke Mark 2, it is time to recall that in addition to a new Chairman, four of the Fed's voting members will also rotate. And while below is the latest preview of the voting FOMC members (previously 2011 and 2012) ranked by Reuters in terms of their dovishness and hawiskness, the reality is that the peripheral Fed presidents (here we focus on the Hawks obviously) are nothing but figureheads whose only function is to be roundly ignored if and when they dissent with the new Chairman.

Which is why we will simply conclude with what we said roughly a year ago, which so far has turned out to be spot on: "the voting FOMC members are merely the supporting cast of the top three: Ben, Janet and Daniel, and at the end of the day, it is always about Bernanke. So while the FOMC may get one more borderline hawk, it is getting two more far more vocal doves, which likely means that at the end of the day, there will be zero change in the Fed's posture in 2013, which at the end of the day is always about one simple thing: i) injecting reserves into dealers so they can use the cash to fund prop trading, and ii) to monetize the US deficit. It also means that the 2013 run-rate of TSY and MBS monetization of $1 trillion will last not only through the end of the year, but almost certainly past year end 2014. Everything else is smoke and mirrors." Like the now annual debt ceiling farce.

Source: Reuters

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Bay of Pigs's picture

Bullshit, there are no FED hawks.

gjp's picture

That's for sure.  And any scale that paints Bernanke as only 'dovish' vs. outright, raving, breast-beating, cooing-from-the-rooftops, doviest of all doves (except for his successor) isn't worth even a fiat dime.

knukles's picture

Ain't gonna be any taper.
For a long time.
The Fed's more concerned about the prospect of deflation rather than inflation.
Note I said "Fed's concerned".... Not Knuks, not my next door neighbor, not Everyman. 
The Fed.

Gonna be buying bonds and notes for a long time.
The only reason they might cut back will be that they become so far into ownership of sop much Treasury paper, there's none left for collateral... which won't essentially be a cut in demand as there just won't be enough to go around.

And of course, the economy and everything is fixed so well.... (sarc)

Dr. Engali's picture

There is about as much chance of the fed tapering as there is the odds of Robotrader getting stock trade right before it moves.

ATM's picture

The Fed will never taper because the Treasury cannot bear higher interest expenses. Government makes the conditions it needs to spend money. High rates don't allow them to shower our money on their friends at will. Higher rates means that bond holds get paid more and bureaucrats can spend less.

Ain't going to happen - ever.


alangreedspank's picture

At this point it's pretty irrelevant whether there is or not, the chairman just does wtf he/she wants to please the president.

Grande Tetons's picture



We need an avian flu. 

achmachat's picture

12 doves vs. 5 (apparent, for P.R. purposes)hawks


hawks lose. QE foreveer!

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Don't kid yourself.  Of the "Permanent Members" only Stein is a "hawk".  Even then...

He's merely the "Designated Controlled Opposition".  The Designated Perma-Hawk.  Rickards was right:  These guys will keep printing till it pops.

Then they will simply hit the Reset button and start over.  With the Usual Suspects of CB friends aiding, abetting and profiting. 

In the words of LoP:  "Roll the fucking Guillotines already!"

ATM's picture

They won't hit the reset button, we will.

NOTaREALmerican's picture

Don't fight the Fed.

Grande Tetons's picture

Fight the Fed by buying gold, silver, land, defaulting on unsecured credit, obtaining a second passport.......

Dr. Engali's picture

Besides the fact that "fed hawks" is a joke ....Here is a little Thursday humor for everybody:


$2 Billion NSA Spy Center is Going Up in Flames



knukles's picture

How come I'm the only one concluding that this is another example of Cyber-Warfare taking place?

No way these people are that dumb... I mean they already have all the experience necessary to do this, running a bazillion other data centers....

But they keep having these "problems"
Remember, there're the Chinee, Iranians and plenty of others who'd have no less than a first significant effort to screw over the NoShitsAholes operations as a signal in return not to fuck with them, or in retaliation.

Plus, the complex is not just for domestic data.  Its Global and Big ENough To Contain the Size of the Total Internet a Bazillion Times Over  (Read Wired's articles)

Suxtnet was but a single example of the Cyber-War in which the World Powers are deeply engaged at the current time.

ATM's picture

You aren't the only one. I rememebr Iranian centrofuges imploding because of a computer virus. Now we have exploding shit in the Utah desert.

I'm hoping it's Anonymous......

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

If I follow another link on that page, I end up at http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Media/Slideshow/2012/10/15/12-Incredible-E...

Aside from these candidates/finalists inappropriately dressed for the occasion, I must admit that although I'm quite partial to nice watermelons, I think that we should pay for our own consumption.

I must also object on the Fed funding seen on p.12 of the above link... Funding "Star Wars day"!?  Star Wars?  WTF!?

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

The only function of the FOMC hawks is to provide plausible deniability.

lolmao500's picture

So even if there would be a majority to say : STOP QE RIGHT FUCKING NOW, the chairman/woman could say : fuck y'all?

hangemhigh77's picture

YES.  If you read the creature from Jekyll Island the 12 districts was just a ruse so the people would think that centralized power would not be on Wall Street.  The Chairman can override all votes and dictatorially just institute what he ot in this case It, wants.  It's a PRIVATE COMPANY, it's not ruled by democratic laws.  Of course neither is this republic ruled by any existing laws.  The whole fucking circus is corrupt.

remain calm's picture

FU QE till the death assholes

hangemhigh77's picture

WHY do we let a PRIVATE COMPANY print MONEY!!??????  WTF!!???  Do ya THINK maaaaaaaaaybe they might become corrupted if someone allows them to PRINT MONEY FROM NOTHING???  No?  We need to START HANGING THESE FUCKING POLITICIANS!!!  THEN THE BANKERS!  HANG THEM FOR TREASON!! ALL OF THEM.  Hey, you want to be a politician? Well the job has it's ups and downs. CONSIDER GETTING YOUR LYING THIEVING ASS HANGED one of the downs............MOTHIERFUCKERS.

ATM's picture

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." Jefferson

Professor Fate's picture

But on the positive side, the rules of the game have never been more clearly laid out.  Jobs and the economy will only improve in the headline news.  They will not improve fundamentally.  The FED will PUMP, PUMP, PUMP.  Trade accordingly.  Real estate is already in a new bubble.  Hedgies movin' out.  Trade accordingly.  Nothing will or can be done about the budget deficit.  It is just a matter of time.  Shorts will ultimately win BIG here when the SFHTF (shit finally hits the fan).  PREPARE accordingly.  PATIENCE! 

Fate the Magnificent
"Push the Button, Max" 

ATM's picture

Shorts have counter parties. 

q99x2's picture

Try them for treason.

The Econ Ideal's picture

The "hawks" on the FOMC or serving as Fed governorships are not true hawks; i.e., there are no "hawks" at the Fed. 

alangreedspank's picture

I think this chart should have only one axis, called "Wanting to keep their cushy jobs and gold plated pension fund" and put everyone of them under it.