Since the onset of the financial crisis, large-scale financial maneuvering by the Federal Reserve has become routine. After its two-day meeting in mid-September, the Fed unveiled its latest plan to reshuffle its trillion-dollar bond portfolio into longer term Treasuries. Will it jumpstart the economy? Or is it, as they say in football, just another Hail Mary pass?
In its announcement last week, the Fed said it would shift around $400 billion from short-term debt (SHY) into longer-term U.S. Treasuries with maturities as short as six years (IEF) to as long as 30 years (TLT). This plan is not a new idea, but a sequel to something tried in the 1960s.
During the Kennedy Presidency, the original Operation Twist amounted to the Fed buying longer term debt and it worked, temporarily. A study by the San Francisco estimated a 0.15% reduction in bond yields. More importantly, the Fed's original twist caught the market off guard. What about now?
Different Kind of Discipline
If the Fed's bold moves have been muted, it has no one to blame but itself. In 2008, it announced a massive mortgage-bond buying program (MBB), giving the market plenty of time to react. This time around, it's repeated that same mistake. The market doesn't just like good news – it likes to be surprised with it.
As with QE1 and QE2, the Fed wants to increase business spending, new investment and to help the housing market (XHB) to recover. According to its board members, keeping interest rates low until 2013 is the prescription, but will it work?
If you're doubting whether the Fed's monetary trickery will be an effective remedy, you're not alone. Richard Fisher, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, has doubts too.
In a recent speech, Fisher said Operation Twist was "a strategic decision where I did not feel the benefits outweighed what I perceived to be the costs." He also added it could increase excessive risk-taking and hurt job creation. Does that sound like a fiscally disciplined Fed to you?
Victims vs. Beneficiaries