I did a review of the Executive Office of the President to identify any pertinent messaging on the currency markets. Almost 14 months into Joe Biden’s first term and I could not find any major policy proposals regarding the currency, at least from within the EOP. The EOP appears to amplify the President’s most important political tool: the power to persuade. Created in 1939 by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the EOP is the day-day extension of the “bully pulpit”, from whence data-supported arguments are supposed to be made and woven into the President’s narrative.
Two of the most important units within the EOP are the Council of Economic Advisers, which is chaired by Dr. Cecilia Rouse, and the National Economic Council, which is headed by Brian Deese. The CEA was established by the Congress in 1946 to advise the president on economic policy. Along with Dr. Rouse are two other council members who together are expected to analyze economic events and provide the President with policy recommendations. Almost 50 years later, President William J. Clinton established the NEC to coordinate domestic and foreign economic policies and implement policy according to the Administration’s economic agenda. In American football parlance, Mr Deese is supposed to be President Biden’s offensive coordinator.
For the purpose of the trader who is trying to parse pertinent political information out of the noise coming out of Washington, she should be mindful that Washington is about narrative building, maintenance, and transmission. The EOP’s explicit mission is to support the messaging and policy agenda of the President and this support helps the President win votes. The implicit mission of the EOP is to convince the electorate, and more specifically those who trade in the American political economy, that this jurisdiction is superior to the other 200 countries on the globe. America is supposed to be the better business model.
At this point in the electoral cycle, the EOP is still trying to keep the electorate supportive of President Biden’s Build Back Better legislation, which is currently still in the Senate. While the pandemic has been a constant cloud over Washington politics, the issues of inflation and the invasion of Ukraine by Russia have sucked the policy oxygen out of the room. The infrastructure legislation passed last year goes into effect today and while touted as a way to expand productive capacity leading to reduction in inflation, effects from that plan, having just gone into effect this year, will take a while to germinate.
One final note is how to avoid the narrative cross fire. Take inflation for example. There are two competing narratives regarding the cause of inflation. The Democratic Party are selling the narrative that supply chain issues are the major cause of inflation and if the United States is to reduce inflation head on, the infrastructure deal and broader social net agenda contained in Build Back Better are necessary in order to expand the economic and social infrastructure thus reducing physical and social supply congestion and constraints.
The Republican Party, on the other hand, are making the argument that inflation is more closely related to the supply of money, where there is too much money chasing too few goods, and that increased fiscal spending will only make inflation worse.
The trader, again, should keep in mind that she should separate out the “vote buying” aspect of the narrative from the “market making” aspect of the narrative. The focus should be on how whether fiscal or monetary policy provides better insights on where inflation and interest rates are going.
Right now, nothing out of Executive Office of the President is helping to quell the noise.
For consultation on how this political or legal event impacts your foreign exchange trade, request an appointment at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Call to action: To support this page, please visit our advertisers. You may also visit the sidebar and make a donation via PayPal.
Disclaimer: The above is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as financial or legal advice or as creating an agreement to provide financial or legal advice.