April 25, 2024

News Analysis: Quiet Rivalry Over the Next Fed Leader Comes Out of the Shadows

This time is different.

As President Obama considers potential successors to the current Fed chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, a debate about the merits of the chief contenders has exploded into public view, with supporters of Janet Yellen, the Fed’s vice-chairwoman, seeking to mobilize support in her favor and against her chief rival, Lawrence H. Summers, formerly the president’s chief economic policy adviser.

The White House sought to lower the temperature on Friday by putting out word that the president was unlikely to announce a choice before the autumn. But a combination of circumstances seems likely to fuel continuing debate.

Mr. Summers, 58, is a provocative figure among key Democratic constituencies. He was a chief architect of financial deregulation during the Clinton administration and later resigned the presidency of Harvard University after making remarks about women that set off a storm of controversy. Ms. Yellen, 66, would become the first woman to lead the Fed, or indeed any major central bank.

Beneath those political currents, there are also indications that Mr. Summers, now a professor at Harvard, and Ms. Yellen disagree about the central issue confronting the central bank: how much longer and how much harder to push for economic growth.

Ms. Yellen is an architect of the Fed’s efforts to reduce unemployment while Mr. Summers and some of his key supporters have said the Fed’s latest round of bond-buying is doing little good and may even be doing considerable harm.

A group of mostly liberal Senate Democrats, including Richard Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 leader, and Patty Murray of Washington, another member of the leadership, signed a letter to Mr. Obama this week calling for Ms. Yellen’s nomination in part because of her commitment to seek faster job growth. It is highly unusual for a group of senators to publicly endorse a specific candidate for such a high-level position.

“Janet Yellen has impressed a lot of us in the Senate with her experience and her focus on getting workers back on the job,” said Ms. Murray, the Senate budget committee chairwoman. “She would certainly be a great and historic choice.”

The letter did not mention Mr. Summers, and it is not clear how many of those senators would oppose his nomination. The White House declined to comment, but officials said at least some of those senators had indicated they would ultimately support Mr. Obama’s choice.

“The key here isn’t that people would vote against Summers, rather it’s that at a time when every confirmation can be long and painful, hers would be smooth — at least on the Democratic side,” said one senior Democratic aide.

Republicans cautioned that Ms. Yellen might struggle to win their support.

“We do hope that the president will nominate someone to the Fed that will exercise modesty in regard to what they feel the central bank’s role is,” said Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican. “I’d like to see someone who is not dovish. Someone who is more towards the center as it relates to monetary policy.”

Mr. Summers questioned the benefits of the Fed’s efforts to stimulate the economy in a 2012 paper written with Brad DeLong, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley. The paper, presented at a Brookings Institution conference, also noted potential costs including, “distortions in the composition of investment, impacts on the health of the financial sector, and impacts on the distribution of income, and the historically clear tendency of low-interest rate environments to give rise to asset market bubbles.”

He made similar remarks at a private investment conference in April, according to a summary obtained by The Financial Times, declaring that the Fed’s bond purchasing “in my view is less efficacious for the real economy than most people suppose.”

Robert Rubin, the former Treasury secretary who has served as a mentor to Mr. Summers in his political career and is among those pressing for his nomination as Fed chairman, criticized the Fed’s policies even more sharply on a panel at the Aspen Institute last month. His remarks suggested that the challenge confronting the next leader of the Federal Reserve was not to direct an attack, but instead to manage a retreat.

Annie Lowrey, Jeremy W. Peters and Michael D. Shear contributed reporting.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/27/business/economy/quiet-rivalry-over-the-next-fed-leader-comes-out-of-the-shadows.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Degrees of Debt: Colleges’ Debt Falls on Students After Construction Binges

A decade-long spending binge to build academic buildings, dormitories and recreational facilities — some of them inordinately lavish to attract students — has left colleges and universities saddled with large amounts of debt. Oftentimes, students are stuck picking up the bill.

Overall debt levels more than doubled from 2000 to 2011 at the more than 500 institutions rated by Moody’s, according to inflation-adjusted data compiled for The New York Times by the credit rating agency. In the same time, the amount of cash, pledged gifts and investments that colleges maintain declined more than 40 percent relative to the amount they owe.

With revenue pinched at institutions big and small, financial experts and college officials are sounding alarms about the consequences of the spending and borrowing. Last month, Harvard University officials warned of “rapid, disorienting change” at colleges and universities.

“The need for change in higher education is clear given the emerging disconnect between ever-increasing aspirations and universities’ ability to generate the new resources to finance them,” said an unusually sobering introduction to Harvard’s annual report for the fiscal year ended in June.

The debate about indebtedness has focused on students and graduates who have borrowed tens of thousands of dollars and are struggling to keep up with their payments. Nearly one in every six borrowers with a student loan balance is in default.

But some colleges and universities have also borrowed heavily, spending money on vast expansions and amenities aimed at luring better students: student unions with movie theaters and wine bars; workout facilities with climbing walls and “lazy rivers”; and dormitories with single rooms and private baths. Spending on instruction has grown at a much slower pace, studies have shown. Students end up covering some, if not most, of the debt payments in the form of higher tuition, room and board and special assessments, while in some instances state taxpayers pick up the costs.

Debt has ballooned at colleges across the board — public and private, elite and obscure. While Harvard is the wealthiest university in the country, it also has $6 billion in debt, the most of any private college, the data compiled by Moody’s shows.

At the Juilliard School, which completed a major renovation a few years ago, debt climbed to $195 million last year, from $6 million in inflation-adjusted dollars in 2002. At Miami University, a public institution in Ohio that is overhauling its dormitories and student union, debt rose to $326 million in 2011, from $66 million in 2002, and at New York University, which has embarked on an ambitious expansion, debt was $2.8 billion in 2011, up from $1.2 billion in 2002, according to the Moody’s data.

The pile of debt — $205 billion outstanding in 2011 at the colleges rated by Moody’s — comes at a time of increasing uncertainty in academia. After years of robust growth, enrollment is flat or declining at many institutions, particularly in the Northeast and Midwest. With outstanding student debt exceeding $1 trillion, students and their parents are questioning the cost and value of college. And online courses threaten to upend the traditional collegiate experience and payment model.

At the same time, the financial crisis and recession created a new and sometimes harrowing financial calculus. Traditional sources of revenue like tuition, state appropriations and endowment returns continue to be squeezed, even as the costs of labor, health care for employees, technology and interest on debt have generally increased.

Students are requiring more and more financial aid, a trend that many believe is unsustainable for all but the wealthiest institutions.

“We’ve had a lot more downgrades than upgrades in the last five years,” said John C. Nelson, managing director of the higher education and health care practice at Moody’s, which has a negative outlook on all but the top state universities and private schools. “There is going to be a thinning out of the ranks.”

For now, the worst financial struggles are confined to stand-alone professional schools and small, tuition-dependent private colleges. For instance, $63 million in debt has left Mount St. Mary’s University, a small Roman Catholic college in Maryland, with thin financial resources and junk-rated credit, according to a Moody’s rating in March.

“We borrowed a lot of money, but we had no choice,” said Thomas H. Powell, the university’s president, who maintains, despite the credit rating, that it has regained its footing and has no need for additional debt. “I wasn’t going to watch the buildings fall down.”

Almost no one is predicting colleges will experience default rates on par with those of indebted students and graduates, at least not anytime soon. While payments on debt principal and interest have increased over all, they remain a manageable piece of the expense pie for most institutions, partly because of historically low interest rates, financial analysts said.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/14/business/colleges-debt-falls-on-students-after-construction-binges.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: A Top Goldman Sachs Executive Departs

Edward Forst in 2005.Jagadesh/ReutersEdward Forst in 2005.

Edward C. Forst, co-head of asset management at Goldman Sachs, is retiring from the Wall Street firm, according to an internal memo sent to employees on Friday.

Mr. Forst, who turns 51 this month, is the highest-ranking executive to leave the firm in recent months. He has been a member of the firm’s influential management committee.

Eric S. Lane will take over from Mr. Forst and will help run the division with Tim O’Neill, the other current co-head.

Revolving Door
View all posts

Mr. Forst has deep roots at Goldman. He joined the firm in 1994 and ran a number of key divisions including capital markets. In 2008, he left Goldman to become an executive vice president at Harvard University, helping on finance, human resources and capital planning. About a year later, however, in a move that surprised many on Wall Street, Goldman hired him back as a senior strategy officer. Mr. Forst took over asset management in 2010, replacing Marc A. Spilker, who left the firm.

While Goldman has not had much turnover in its upper ranks of late, an unusually high number of senior people have left in recent months as the firm presses cut costs in the face of weakening revenue. It is not known whether Mr. Forst’s departure was related to this effort.

Copies of the memos are below:

December 2, 2011
We are pleased to announce that Eric S. Lane has been named co-head of the Investment Management Division. Eric, together with Tim O’Neill who has been co-head of IMD since 2008, will lead our efforts to grow our combined asset management and private wealth platform, which continues to represent one of the firm’s most important businesses and growth opportunities.

Eric has served as chief operating officer of IMD since 2009. In that role, he had oversight for the Private Wealth Management, Alternative Investments, Capital Markets and Goldman Sachs Asset Management Distribution businesses. He is co-chair of the Firmwide Suitability Committee and a member of the Growth Markets Operating Committee, and the IMD and Merchant Banking Division Client and Business Standards Committees.

Eric joined Goldman Sachs in 1996 and, since 1999, has held a variety of senior positions across a number of different businesses in the Investment Management Division. He was named managing director in 2001 and partner in 2002.

As a long-tenured leader in IMD, Eric has demonstrated dedication to our clients and a deep understanding of markets. His extensive experience in the division positions him well to lead IMD with Tim.

Please join us in congratulating Eric and wishing him continued success in his new role.

Lloyd C. Blankfein
Gary D. Cohn
December 2, 2011

After 16 years of service, Edward C. Forst, global co-head of the Investment Management Division, has decided to retire from the firm effective at the end of the year.

Ed joined Goldman Sachs in 1994 in Capital Markets of which he subsequently became co-head. He served as chief of staff to both the Equities and FICC divisions and also served as the co-head of the Global Credit business in FICC. In 2004, Ed was appointed the firm’s chief administrative officer and became a member of the Management Committee. He played an important role in developing our global headquarters in New York. He was appointed co-head of the Investment Management Division in 2007.

Ed left the firm in 2008 to become the first executive vice president of Harvard University. In that role, Ed was the University’s senior operating officer, a senior advisor to the president and a member of the board of the Harvard Management Company.

Ed returned to the firm a year later and became the senior strategy officer of Goldman Sachs and in 2010 was named the co-head of the Investment Management Division with Tim O’Neill. Together they have led our efforts to increase our investing capacity and strategically grow our Investment Management businesses around the world, especially in the growth markets. Ed was the Management Committee sponsor of the Firmwide Black Network and previously the sponsor of the Firmwide Hispanic/Latin Network. He was named managing director in 1996 and partner in 1998.

Ed is a trustee of Carnegie Hall and is the treasurer and a member of the board’s Executive Committee. He is co-chair of Harvard University’s Taskforce on Balanced Philanthropy, co-chair of Harvard’s 30th Reunion campaign, and a member of the University’s Stem Cell Science Advisory Board.

Please join us in thanking Ed for his contributions to the firm and wishing him and his family all the best in the future.

Lloyd C. Blankfein
Gary D. Cohn

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=023ffd69490dd1197be1c3abb8e4bd61