On Firday, 2009-06-26, your panelists commented on whether the Federal Reserve should get the extra powers now contemplated for it. The discussion very quickly turned into one about the fitness and/or popularity of Ben Bernanke, but left open a question: should the chairman of the Federal Reserve have as much power as he (so far it's been 'he') has had? Would it work better or worse as a more collegial body---or is it in fact more so than it would seem because disagreements are not publicly discussed much and the chairman is its public face?

If the chairman is as powerful as he seems, I think it were better that it were not so, better that it not matter as much who the chairman might be. I trust compromises wrought between contending players more than the judgment of one man or woman.