Biden Administration Forced to Abandon Saule Omarova Nomination – Opinion

Despite facing insurmountable odds against Saule Omarova, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency nominee in the U.S Senate, the Biden administration received the resignation letter on Tuesday.

The President characterized the abandonment of the nomination as “… unfortunately, from the very beginning of her nomination, Saule was subjected to inappropriate personal attacks that were far beyond the pale.”

But members of the Senate Banking Committee on both sides of the aisle had grown increasingly uncomfortable with Omarova’s past policy stances on how banks should be organized and regulated; including, supporting radical proposals that would “change banking as we know it” into new forms that would, if pursued, completely reorganize the relationship between individual American’s bank accounts and the federal government; as well as alter the fundamental business economics of the remainder of the banking institution business model for lending and finance.

Omarova’s stated supported proposals would cause banks to cease being depository institutions for individual accounts reassigning these checking and savings “demand deposit accounts” directly to the Federal Reserve.  This was too extreme an agenda to risk for Republican and Democratic senators, especially considering that OCC head has the ability to make such changes.

Omarova raised questions with her support for the National Investment Authority (NIA). This authority would be able to direct capital investment from a central planning entity.  The idea of Washington-based, controlled investment that is not regulated in Washington has raised concerns not only in private sector but also in public opinion.

The closest we’ve come to it recently was in 2020 as part of the Trump administration’s organization of federal resources to combat the COVID-19 crisis. Detractors of the NIA model compare correctly compare the approach to be closer to the one used by the government of China in managing that country’s centrally planned economy. The parallels were politicized, as often happens in the American debate process, which the Biden team interpreted as “personal attacks”.

But the Senators who expressed concern over Omarova’s past support for central authority policies stated that their primary concerns were about balking at applying such radically different principles to the free-market economy model of the United States; particularly so at a time when the US economy remains fragile following almost two years of COVID-19 stress.

It’s clear that the Biden administration overreached attempting to pursue a bold liberal game changing agenda with this nomination. It wasn’t the beliefs, history, or qualifications of the Cornell professor that were put to the test here; it was the question of whether the ambitions of the Biden team remain aligned with the national interest of the United States as 2021 ends and the stresses of 2022 loom on the horizon. For the Washington establishment’s comfort, the next nominee must have more traditional views.

For Dr. Omarova, the answer is that the nation will carry on under someone else’s stewardship.