This Friday, John Cochrane shares a list of questions he has for the next chair of the Federal Reserve; David Henderson analyzes how Trump’s tariff policy program is playing out; and Peter Robinson discusses the complex legacy of Woodrow Wilson with historian and public servant Christopher Cox.
Answering Challenges to Advanced Economies
Writing at The Wall Street Journal, Senior Fellow John H. Cochrane proposes a list of questions to which “a wise Fed chair will need answers.” Noting that his list of queries is only “the tip of the iceberg,” Cochrane argues that “Congress and the media should ask potential Fed chiefs” about: inflation rate targets and price stability, employment goals, quantitative easing and interest rates, and the propriety of policy coordination with the US Treasury. Cochrane also thinks it would be valuable to know where the next Fed chair stands on buying mortgage-backed securities, ending bailouts, managing financial sector risks, and reforms to Treasury markets. In Cochrane’s view, the next head of the Federal Reserve should have compelling answers to these questions because the “financial and monetary system have evolved past the current Fed.” Read more here. [Subscription required]
International Trade Policy
At Defining Ideas, Research Fellow David R. Henderson checks in on the impacts of the Trump administration’s tariff policy. He argues, “We seem to be headed to a world in which our tariff rates are a multiple of what they were before Trump began his second term.” He also asks, “Is there any way to bail out Trump’s belief that higher US tariffs on imports are a win for the United States?” Henderson pushes back on the claim that tariffs are a necessary response to other countries subsidizing the production of cheap goods that US producers can’t compete with, saying that foreign subsidies actually benefit US consumers even as they reduce the welfare of citizens in subsidizing states. Reviewing the pattern of US trade negotiations over tariffs in recent months, Henderson finds, “President Trump seems to see it as a victory when he gets other countries’ governments to cut their tariff rates on our exports but he maintains high tariff rates on US imports.” Read more here.
Ahead of a Friday deadline for imposing additional tariffs set by the Trump administration, Research Fellow Lanhee J. Chen joined Bloomberg’s Balance of Power to discuss the administration’s trade policy negotiation tactics. “I think that we have to hold all of these deadlines very loosely . . . the reality is, the president is not immune to what the markets are telling him about how people feel about the impact of tariffs,” said Chen. Chen suggested that other nations may end up with a “Mexico-style reprieve” from tariffs should they indicate a willingness to strike a trade deal, but request more time to do so. Moreover, he argued that Trump has introduced a new “baseline” for tariff rates headed into August negotiations, marking a significant shift in US trade policy. Chen also provides his analysis of some of the competing influences on the president in the realm of trade policy, noting the lingering uncertainty of which camps in the administration will have the greatest influence on trade policy. Watch here. [Appearance begins at 40:00]
Revitalizing History
Was Woodrow Wilson a visionary statesman—or a reactionary bigot? For Uncommon Knowledge, Distinguished Policy Fellow Peter M. Robinson sits down with historian and former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox to discuss his latest book, Woodrow Wilson: The Light Withdrawn, a meticulously researched biography of the 28th president of the United States. Together, they explore Wilson’s complicated legacy: his towering achievements as a reformer and wartime leader and his deeply troubling record on race, gender, and civil rights. From his opposition to women’s suffrage and his resegregation of the federal government to his embrace of the film The Birth of a Nation, Cox reveals how Wilson’s Southern upbringing and elitist worldview shaped both his presidency and progressivism itself. This conversation offers a sobering reappraisal of one of America’s most consequential and controversial leaders—and asks what it means to judge historical figures by the standards of both their time and ours. Watch or listen here.
Hoover Institution News
After years of leading Hoover’s Robert and Marion Oster National Security Affairs Fellows (NSAF) Program, where serving US military, law enforcement, diplomatic, and intelligence professionals spend a year in fellowship at Hoover, Senior Fellow Amy Zegart saw an opportunity to get Stanford undergraduate students involved. “I remember a couple years ago, one of our fellows came and he told me this was the very first time he had ever set foot on a civilian university campus,” Zegart said of what inspired the NSAF program. “[It] really spoke to how unusual this experience was and so I wanted these two communities who don’t usually interact with each other to understand one another.” Out of the wider NSAF program came the National Security Affairs Fellows Mentorship Program. The program selects approximately thirty students with a range of backgrounds and viewpoints, and each NSAF is paired with two to three students for the full academic year. Under the guidance of Zegart, the full cohort of NSAFs teach an undergraduate seminar to the students that meets every other week, and participating undergrads write quarterly reflection papers about their experiences in the program.
In an introduction to a new video series on the National Security Affairs Fellows Mentorship Program, Zegart describes her vision for the program as fostering meaningful discussions on national security, forging civilian-military relationships, and developing leadership from both Stanford students and their NSAF mentors. Watch the full series here. Read more here.
Related Commentary