UPDATE NEW: SENATE DRAMA 51-45 Vote Gives President Donald Trump One of Biggest Wins of His Presidency
Washington, D.C. - June 26, 2026
Senate Confirms Kevin Warsh to Federal Reserve Board in 51-45 Vote, Advancing Trump’s Economic Agenda
The Senate on Tuesday confirmed Kevin Warsh to the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors in a 51-45 vote, delivering a significant victory for President Donald Trump’s efforts to reshape the central bank. The confirmation advances Trump’s plan to install Warsh as the next chair of the Federal Reserve, succeeding Jerome Powell whose term as chair expires Friday.
Warsh, a former Fed governor from 2006 to 2011, is a longtime critic of the central bank’s policies on balance sheet size, bank regulation, and communication practices. He has indicated openness to interest rate cuts in recent statements, aligning with Trump’s repeated calls for lower rates to stimulate economic growth and support American businesses and households.
In confirmation hearings, Warsh pledged to maintain the Fed’s independence in setting monetary policy.
“I will be an independent actor if confirmed as chair of the Federal Reserve,” he stated last month.
The position fills the seat previously held temporarily by Stephen Miran, a Trump aide who took a leave from the White House Council of Economic Advisers to serve on the Fed after an early resignation created the vacancy. Miran’s term officially expired in January but he remained on the board until a replacement was confirmed. Miran became known for consistently advocating lower interest rates during his time on the Federal Open Market Committee, often dissenting from the majority view in recent policy meetings.
Warsh’s term as a Fed governor will run until 2040. He will serve alongside two governors nominated during Trump’s first term and three nominated by former President Joe Biden. Trump’s attempts to remove one Biden appointee have so far been blocked by courts, preserving the current balance on the seven-member board for now.
Powell has not indicated how long he plans to remain on the Fed board after his chair term ends. His governor term runs until January 2028. He has pledged to maintain a low profile in the coming months as the leadership transition unfolds.
The vote reflects Republican unity on the nomination, with all Republicans supporting Warsh. Several Democrats opposed the confirmation. The move is part of Trump’s broader effort to align the Federal Reserve more closely with its economic priorities while maintaining the institution’s formal independence. Supporters argue that fresh perspectives at the Fed are needed to address persistent challenges in inflation management and sustainable growth.
Warsh graduated from Stanford University and Harvard Law School. After leaving the Fed in 2011, he worked as a Hoover Institution fellow and as an adviser to billionaire investor Stanley Druckenmiller. He is married to Jane Lauder, granddaughter of Estée Lauder, and has significant personal wealth. His extensive experience in both public policy and private finance is expected to shape his approach to monetary decision-making.
The confirmation comes as the Fed has held interest rates steady in recent meetings. Miran, who dissented on several rate decisions, had pushed for larger cuts to ease financial conditions more aggressively. Warsh’s arrival is likely to intensify internal debates over the appropriate pace of any future easing.
The Senate still needs to vote separately to confirm Warsh as chair of the Board of Governors. That vote is expected later this week and is widely anticipated to follow a similar partisan divide, though the outcome appears secure given Republican control of the chamber.
The development underscores the priority the Trump administration places on aligning the Federal Reserve more closely with its economic priorities while maintaining the institution’s formal independence. Analysts expect Warsh’s leadership, if confirmed as chair, to focus on balancing inflation control with economic growth. Markets are already adjusting expectations for the timing and magnitude of potential rate reductions in the months ahead, with investors closely monitoring signals from the new governor about his policy leanings.
This confirmation represents a key early step in the administration’s strategy to influence the direction of U.S. monetary policy. With Warsh now positioned to potentially lead the central bank, attention will turn to how he navigates the delicate balance between supporting the president’s growth objectives and preserving the Fed’s credibility as an independent institution. The coming weeks are expected to provide further clarity on the future path of interest rates and the broader economic outlook under this evolving leadership.
CBS Host LOSES IT After Sen. Kennedy FACT CHECKS Her Trump LIES… THIS GOT BAD!...
CBS Host PRESSES John Kennedy on Trump’s Spending — His Answer Takes an Unexpected Turn
The interview began with some of the biggest questions facing Washington: the conflict with Iran, rising fuel costs, and the approaching midterm elections. But when Republican Senator John Kennedy appeared on Face the Nation with CBS host Margaret Brennan, the conversation quickly moved toward an issue that could shape the political debate for months to come: how the government spends taxpayers’ money.
Kennedy did not pretend that the economic pressure facing American families was insignificant. He argued that voters were far more concerned about the cost of living than the daily battles playing out on television. With oil prices affected by disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz, he said, the consequences of foreign policy were reaching directly into household budgets.
Kennedy Brings the Conversation Back to Affordability
Kennedy’s message to the White House was unusually direct. He predicted that the midterm elections would be close and argued that Republicans needed to keep their attention on the financial concerns of ordinary Americans.
“When moms and dads lie down to sleep at night and can't,” Kennedy told Brennan, they are worried about the cost of living.
He also called for a nationwide address explaining why the United States entered the conflict with Iran, what the administration hoped to achieve, and how it intended to bring the situation to a conclusion.
His position was not a blanket rejection of the administration’s strategy. Kennedy defended continued pressure on Iran while acknowledging the economic consequences of the partially closed strait. He opposed sending American troops into the situation, warning that deploying them could create a new set of problems.
That combination—support for pressure abroad alongside concern about prices at home—set the tone for the rest of the interview.
Nearly $1 Billion in Cuts Sparks a Constitutional Dispute
The conversation became more pointed when Brennan asked about the White House’s decision to cancel nearly $1 billion in previously approved federal funding without congressional consent.
Brennan raised concerns expressed by Senator Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, who argued that the move threatened Congress’s constitutional authority over federal spending.
Kennedy disagreed.
“I love Susan like a taco, but she's wrong,” he said before explaining his view that Congress often appropriates money in broad categories, leaving agencies with considerable discretion over how funds are ultimately used.
He then deployed the phrase that would become the interview’s most memorable sound bite: “Spending porn.”
Kennedy used the expression to criticize what he considers wasteful government expenditures, pointing to funding for circumcision programs in Zambia and electric buses in Rwanda. He also argued that Congress should take greater responsibility for identifying and eliminating spending it believes is unnecessary.
But the disagreement was about more than whether particular programs were worthwhile. It raised a larger question: when Congress approves funding, how much authority should the executive branch have to cancel or redirect it?
Kennedy defended the cuts, while Brennan’s question highlighted the legal and constitutional objections. The interview did not resolve that dispute, but it brought the competing arguments into sharp focus.
Then Kennedy Turned the Standard on Trump
The most revealing moment came when Brennan shifted from the proposed cuts to taxpayer-funded advertising.
She asked Kennedy about a government-funded commercial prominently featuring President Donald Trump and praising his leadership. The question echoed earlier controversy surrounding former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose department had spent $220 million on a border-security advertising campaign in which she appeared prominently.
Kennedy had previously criticized Noem’s campaign. Now, with Trump featured in another advertisement paid for by the federal government, Brennan asked whether that spending was appropriate.
Kennedy’s response was notable because he explicitly included his own political allies—and himself—in the principle he was defending.
“I don't think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves,” he said.
He acknowledged that the White House viewed the issue differently but argued that public funds should not be used to promote individual politicians. He also suggested that politicians should not have buildings named after them while they are still alive.
That answer complicated any attempt to portray his position as simply a defense of the administration. Kennedy supported the proposed spending cuts, but he also applied his criticism of taxpayer-funded self-promotion to Trump.
The Real Takeaway From the Interview
The exchange was not a shouting match, nor does the published transcript establish that Brennan lost her composure or that Kennedy fact-checked a series of false statements from her. What it does show is a pointed discussion about economic priorities, congressional spending authority, and whether public money should be used to enhance a politician’s image.
Kennedy’s argument was straightforward: families are worried about affordability, government spending deserves scrutiny, and the rules should apply regardless of party.
Whether viewers agree with his assessment of the proposed cuts is a separate question. The legal dispute over executive spending authority and the debate over taxpayer-funded political advertising deserve examination beyond a few memorable television lines.
The moment worth watching is when Brennan moves from criticizing government spending in general to asking Kennedy about an advertisement featuring Trump himself. That is where the discussion becomes more complicated—and where Kennedy’s stated principle is tested against his own party’s leadership.
Watch the full interview through the link below to hear the exchange in context and decide how convincing each side’s argument really was.
