This week an economic hero of mine got a new job. 

Lael Brainard has been named the director of the National Economic Council (NEC). The council advises the president on matters of economic policy, both domestic and international. She follows economic giants such as Larry Summers and Laura Tyson in that role which aspires to place fiscal policy on a firm economic track rather than the political track that too often plagues Washington. 

In naming Brainard, some argue that she is a bit of an economic dove. I believe they have her wrong. First, she is strong and confident in her economic views. She currently believes, as I do, that the worst of inflation is behind us, but that it is so ingrained in our Zeitgeist now that even the low rate hovering between two and three percent will be difficult to bring down. 

Readers of this page know that the Fed is throwing everything at inflation now, and may indeed be overdoing it a bit. But, given their late start, they probably have little choice. To use a flying analogy again, if one is behind the curve and the plane is flying us, don’t chase it. Instead, keep a steady hand in the direction and altitude, and power you ought to go, and wait until the flying machine comes around to you. 

In this case, it means placing the interest rate at about what it should be in the long run, which is still perhaps half a point to a point higher than it is right now, stop the quantitative easing and get the Fed’s books back to where they ought to be, and wait. This prudent path may appear dovish to some, but it is merely prudent to Ms. Brainard and me. 

On the other hand, just a year and a half ago, as her then boss at the Fed, Jerome Powell, was pining for the political reappointment of the Fed chief, and Ms. Brainard’s name was bandied around too, she stuck to her intuition back then as well. 

A year and a half ago was a different economic era, well before rampant inflation, but with rising prices on the horizon. She was a rare and righteous voice then, as she advocated for higher interest rates to ward off inflation and reverse the troubling fiscal stimulating policy that two presidents by then had turned to at every opportunity. 

Then, they called her a hawk. 

She is neither a dove or a hawk. Her economic temperament is to stay ahead of the economy, even if it hurts, so it need not hurt any longer than necessary should we do too little too late. 

Had we listened to her then, we would not be in this place now. But, she was not going to modify the message just to improve her chances of being nominated to the Fed chair, and she is not going to pull any punches now either. 

It is a bit unnerving for me to find myself in total agreement with her somewhat contrarian economic opinions because I realize that a dose of realism does not go over well when the people all around are suffering from wishful thinking. I can’t think of a better choice for the NEC director from an intellectual perspective, but I can’t imagine it would be a pleasant job leading up to an election year when the first instinct of presidents in the very recent past when faced with a good economy is to throw money at it. And, if the economy is in bad shape, then throw money at it then too. 

Of course, she will direct the NEC, but she is not the only member of the NEC. Many of the others are politicians, cabinet members, and executive branch up-and-comers. I’m afraid that these are not the types that are willing to lean against the political winds. 

It won’t be easy to reverse political tides, but if anybody can do it, she’s the one. Her skills at recognizing the important data and ignoring the noise will be invaluable. But, her prescriptions won’t be what the inside-the-beltway crowd, of either stripe, want to hear, though. 

I will be watching and hoping.