Senator Chuck Grassley said today he will vote against giving Ben Bernanke another term as chairman of the Federal Reserve. According to the Des Moines Register,
"I'll vote no because of concerns of inflation and a pattern of resistance to accountability," Grassley said. [...]
Grassley dismissed the argument that defeating Bernanke would throw the financial markets off course. [...]
"The Fed takes action once a month that affects the stock market," Grassley added. "And we're still going to have a Fed chairman. So, what's the big deal?"
I find it odd that Grassley is concerned primarily about inflation in the current economic environment, and as Bleeding Heartland user PrairieBreezeCheese pointed out, even 1970s-like inflation is very different from the "hyper-inflation" Grassley warned about yesterday. Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the only Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee to vote against confirming Bernanke last month, has laid out a stronger case against giving him another term. I am also in rare agreement with Republican Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky, who has called for all senators to have a chance to review some unpublished Federal Reserve documents before voting on Bernanke's nomination.
I've seen many different "whip counts" on Bernanke. It appears he will have little trouble gaining the support of at least 50 senators, and I doubt his nomination will be filibustered, because some Democrats who plan to vote against confirming him will vote for cloture.