November 22, 2024

Mario Draghi to Head Europe’s Central Bank

Mr. Draghi, the 63-year-old governor of the Bank of Italy, will succeed Jean-Claude Trichet as Europe’s most powerful central banker, according to a communiqué from the 27 member states at a two-day summit meeting that ended Friday.

The announcement had been delayed because of concern expressed by France over losing a powerful voice when Mr. Trichet, a Frenchman, leaves his post in autumn. France asked that another French citizen be appointed to the central bank’s executive board to bolster France’s influence. To do so, a vacancy had to be created, and because Mr. Draghi is Italian, the obvious candidate to go, in France’s view, was Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, an Italian on the six-member board.

Mr. Bini Smaghi had to be persuaded to leave voluntarily before his term expired in 2013 because board members cannot be fired. But the Italian prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, had refused to provide one possible incentive: giving Mr. Bini Smaghi the job at the Bank of Italy soon to be vacated by Mr. Draghi.

But after speaking Friday with Herman Van Rompuy of Belgium, who led the summit meeting as president of the European Council, Mr. Bini Smaghi called the French President Nicolas Sarkozy to say that he would step down. That is expected to occur by the end of the year, Mr. Berlusconi said.

Aside from straining relations between France and Italy, the dispute over the executive board had also been seen by some as a test of the independence of the central bank. At one point, Mr. Bini Smaghi had appeared to compare his predicament to that of Thomas More, who was sentenced to death in 1535 in Britain for defying King Henry VIII.

Mr. Draghi has not signaled plans to make any major policy shifts in his new job, which he is to assume on Nov. 1.

On the contrary, Mr. Draghi has kept a low profile since he emerged as the default candidate earlier this year. In an interview in February he stuck to the central bank’s hymn sheet, refusing to talk about himself and emphasizing his credentials as a crusader against inflation.

Monetary policy should “first and foremost be geared toward price stability,” Mr. Draghi said.

Mr. Draghi is already an influential member of the central bank’s broader governing council, and is well known in international policy-making circles as chairman of the Financial Stability Board, a European Union panel that is formulating new banking rules intended to prevent future financial crises. He is expected to retain that post.

He will take over the bank as it navigates the worst crisis since the euro was introduced in 1999. Because the 17-nation euro zone lacks a strong central government, the bank has been forced to act as crisis manager, providing emergency funds to stricken banks, buying government bonds to try to stabilize markets, while often clashing with political leaders on policy.

So far, Mr. Draghi seems to have many of the same qualities as Mr. Trichet, including discretion born of years of government service and an ability to stand up to political pressure.

Once in office he could forge his own path, but it would be a surprise if he made any striking changes. At the Bank of Italy, Mr. Draghi has been known for being cautious and deliberate, to the point where some said he was too slow to make decisions.

Germany had been expected to name the next president of the central bank, but the selection process was thrown open in February after Axel Weber, the president of the Bundesbank, unexpectedly announced he would resign and took himself out of the running.

Unlike Mr. Weber, who now teaches at the University of Chicago, Mr. Draghi has not dissented publicly from other members of the bank’s governing council in responding to the sovereign debt crisis involving Greece. Analysts regard Mr. Draghi as a hard-liner on inflation, though less so than Mr. Weber would have been.

Mr. Draghi, who holds a doctorate in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was the consensus choice of economists for the job but had to overcome political resistance because he is from a country that, unlike Germany, is associated with fiscal irresponsibility.

Mr. Draghi also overcame questions from the European Parliament about his stint from 2002 to 2005 as vice chairman and managing director of Goldman Sachs. The American investment bank was the lead manager in a 2001 derivatives transaction that allowed Greece to dress up its books in a way that helped it become one of the countries using the euro.

“I joined Goldman after these operations had been undertaken, and that’s it,” Mr. Draghi said in February. “I was never involved in this.”

Before joining Goldman, Mr. Draghi spent a decade as the top bureaucrat in the Italian treasury, where he was known for deftly navigating the minefield of Italian power politics. He became governor of the Bank of Italy at the end of 2005, and since then has sometimes annoyed Italian leaders by pushing them to do more to make the economy competitive and reduce public debt.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=88a17a7cf40c67dce02e6f372b8373c7

AARP Is Open to Cuts for Social Security Benefits

The group’s stance, which generated quick reaction from all sides because of its powerful voice on the issue, could provide added ammunition to fiscal conservatives who have sought unsuccessfully to restructure Social Security and chip away at the benefits it promises older Americans.

“Our goal is to limit any changes in benefits,” John Rother, AARP’s policy chief, said in a telephone interview, “but we also want to see the system made solvent.”

Mr. Rother said the group’s stance on possible cuts, which was first reported in The Wall Street Journal in Friday’s editions, should be seen less as a major change in position than as a reflection of the political and financial realities facing the Social Security system and the country as a whole.

“You have to look at all the tradeoffs,” Mr. Rother said, “and what we’re trying to do is engage the American public in that debate.”

He made clear that the group’s willingness to discuss cuts comes with conditions: Reductions in benefits should be “minimal,” they should not affect current recipients and instead should be directed “far off in the future,” and they should be offset by increases in tax-generated revenue.

Nonetheless, the group’s openness to the possibility of unspecified cuts was seen as a significant development by people on all sides of the Social Security question because of AARP’s influence on federal policies affecting older Americans, including Medicare, prescription drugs and many more.

Third Way, a moderate Democratic group in Washington that has favored possible reductions in benefits, called AARP’s position “a watershed moment” in the debate over Social Security.

“Now that they have opened the door to reform, it is time for lawmakers to walk through it,” said Jonathan Cowan, president of Third Way.

But other advocacy groups that are pushing to preserve Social Security benefits accused AARP of effectively abandoning its core constituency.

Max Richtman, executive vice president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, an advocacy group in Washington, said the timing of AARP’s statements was particularly bad because it came in the midst of deliberations between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans about the debt ceiling and overall deficit reduction.

AARP insisted that the Social Security trust funds should not be raided to reduce the deficit and that the two issues were separate. But Mr. Richtman said the group’s openness to considering future cuts would no doubt be used by deficit hawks to push for immediate cuts in Social Security benefits as part of the debate over deficit reduction.

“I think it’s tragic that AARP would, wittingly or unwittingly, play into the hands of people who have never really liked Social Security and want to decimate it,” Mr. Richtman said. “AARP is the 800-pound gorilla, but they do not speak for seniors.”

Republican leaders, who have led calls for revamping Social Security, had no immediate comments on AARP’s willingness to consider benefit reductions.

An aide to the Republican-led House Ways and Means Committee, who spoke on condition of anonymity under committee protocol, said AARP’s position was a welcome acknowledgment that Social Security would be unable to pay future benefits at the current rate and that it must be restructured.

“The longer we wait,” the aide said, “the more difficult it will be to protect current beneficiaries and those who rely on Social Security the most.”

The most recent projections from the Social Security Administration, issued last month, indicate that at the current rate, the program’s trust funds will be exhausted by 2036, and that $6.5 trillion in additional money will be needed over a 75-year period to pay all scheduled benefits.

Mr. Rother said AARP expected to hear criticism from some of its members over its position on possible cuts.

“We have such a broad membership, Mr. Rother said. “I’m sure there will be some who will not be happy, but others will be eager to see the program put on a stronger financial footing for the long term.”

While AARP has not issued specific recommendations or figures on how benefit reductions might be carried out, the group’s recent discussions with its members signal support for using increased revenue to fill two-thirds of the projected gap, and benefits reductions for one-third, Mr. Rother said.

As word of AARP’s position set off debate in Washington on Friday, the group’s chief executive, Barry Rand, issued a formal statement saying that the group’s position had not changed in any substantive way and refuting what he described as “misleading” media reports.

“Let me be clear — AARP is as committed as we’ve ever been to fighting to protect Social Security for today’s seniors and strengthening it for future generations,” Mr. Rand said. 

While he did not directly address the question of possible cuts in benefits in his statement, Mr. Rand said his group would be working to evaluate any proposed changes in Social Security “to determine how each might — individually or in different combinations — impact the lives of current and future retirees.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=0f1567d25a70e9abc732adef8d162a32