Adriana Kugler may return to Georgetown University as professor: A journey from academia to US Fed governor and back
Kugler, the first Hispanic woman to serve on the Fed's Board, submitted her resignation in advance of her term's official end in January 2026. The decision comes during a politically charged period for the Federal Reserve as US President
Donald Trump
weighs options to shape the central bank's leadership ahead of a major transition next year.
From World Bank to Washington
Kugler's return to academia would close a meaningful chapter in a career that has spanned research, policymaking, and global finance.
Her service on the Fed Board began in September 2023 after a presidential nomination and Senate confirmation that made headlines for the historic nature of her appointment. Prior to that, she held the role of US Executive Director at the World Bank Group and served as chief economist at the US Department of Labor between 2011 and 2013.
An academic with policy roots
Throughout her career, Kugler has remained deeply connected to the academic and research ecosystem. She is currently on leave from Georgetown, a university where she has long been a faculty member. She also held research affiliations with the National Bureau of Economic Research and Stanford University's Center for the
Study of Poverty and Inequality.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
No annual fees for life
UnionBank Credit Card
Apply Now
Undo
Within professional circles, she has served as the elected chair of the Business and Economics Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association, as well as an advisory member on committees of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Academies of Sciences.
With a Bachelor of Arts (BA) in economics and political science from McGill University and a PhD in economics from the University of California, Berkeley, Kugler has consistently bridged rigorous academic training with policy impact.
Her research contributions have touched on labor markets, education, and the economic impacts of regulation, often with a focus on data-driven policy design.
A vacancy with political weight
Kugler's early departure from the Federal Reserve adds a layer of complexity to the political and institutional dynamics surrounding the central bank's leadership. Under Federal Reserve rules, the chair must be chosen from among the existing members of the board.
With her exit, Trump may have a limited window to nominate a new governor, someone he could eventually elevate to chair when Jerome Powell's term ends in May 2026.
According to
Bloomberg
, the president has not yet selected a candidate, but potential names include National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and current Governor Christopher Waller.
Powell, whose term as chair ends in May, retains a board seat until 2028. If he chooses not to resign, Trump will not have another opening on the board before then unless another member steps down.
That makes Kugler's vacant seat an immediate opportunity for the administration.
While the political implications of her resignation are likely to dominate headlines, Kugler's path back to academia underscores another story.
It highlights the ongoing dialogue between research and policy, and the professionals who move between the two. Her return to Georgetown University would bring a rare combination of international policy experience, economic leadership, and academic depth to the classroom.
In a time when the intersection of economics, governance, and public trust is under sharp scrutiny, voices like Kugler's remain essential not only in Washington but in shaping the next generation of economists, policymakers, and public thinkers.
TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us
here.
Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Explained: Presidential Fitness Test, why Obama scrapped it and Trump brought it back to schools
(AP Photo/John McDonnell) In the storied annals of American school life, few memories are as unifying or divisive as the Presidential Fitness Test. For decades, it was the gym class rite of passage: Mile runs timed to the second, push-ups counted with unwavering scrutiny, sit-and-reach stretches measuring flexibility like a litmus test of youth. But by 2012, the very programme that once symbolised national strength had quietly disappeared from schools across the country. Now, more than a decade later, President Donald Trump has revived it, and with it, a cultural debate over health, discipline, and the meaning of fitness in America. The rise and fall of a national ritual Introduced under President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956, the Presidential Fitness Test was born out of Cold War anxieties. A government-sponsored study had revealed that American children were falling behind their European peers in basic physical competency, a revelation so startling that Sports Illustrated called it 'The Report That Shocked the President.' Eisenhower responded by launching the President's Council on Youth Fitness, positioning physical readiness as a matter of national pride and preparedness. Later, under President John F. Kennedy, the programme took on moral and even patriotic dimensions. In his now-famous Sports Illustrated essay, 'The Soft American,' Kennedy warned that the nation's declining physical standards were a threat to its very fabric. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 20 Unforgettable Cars from the Past Undo Successive presidents followed suit, and the test became a nationwide benchmark, awarding badges, patches, and certificates to students who performed in the top percentiles. By the early 2000s, however, the test had become increasingly controversial. Though it was designed to inspire excellence, many educators and child health experts began to see it as a flawed, outdated measure, one that privileged athleticism over wellness and often shamed students who struggled to meet its rigid standards. Why Obama phased it out In 2012, the Obama administration made a decisive break with the past. The Presidential Fitness Test was formally retired and replaced by the Presidential Youth Fitness Program, a reimagined, data-driven model focused on personal growth rather than competition. The shift reflected a broader evolution in public health thinking. Rather than spotlighting top performers, the new programme emphasised 'personal bests' and long-term well-being. Using the FitnessGram assessment, it evaluated students on metrics like aerobic capacity, body composition, and muscular endurance — but in a way designed to reduce peer comparison and performance pressure. 'The new program has moved away from recognizing athletic performance to providing a barometer on student's health,' the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) noted at the time. It was a deliberate move toward inclusivity, particularly for students with disabilities, varying body types, or low baseline fitness. In Obama's vision, the goal was not to cultivate elite athletes, but to instill lifelong habits of physical activity. Health experts widely supported the change, citing research that early exposure to high-pressure physical tests could contribute to anxiety, body image issues, and disengagement from exercise altogether. At a time when mental health and inclusivity were gaining currency in education policy, the Obama administration's decision appeared both timely and humane. Trump's revival : A new battle for the body But in 2025, President Trump has brought the Presidential Fitness Test back, with all its original rigour, symbolism, and competitive edge. The decision, delivered via executive order, is part of the Trump administration's broader campaign to address what it calls 'crisis levels' of obesity, inactivity, and poor nutrition among American youth. The move follows a blistering report released in May by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which warned that rates of childhood chronic diseases, from diabetes to depression, are accelerating at an alarming pace due to sedentary lifestyles. 'This was a wonderful tradition, and we're bringing it back,' Trump said at the signing ceremony. His new order revives the test's iconic components, the mile run, push-ups, sit-ups, and flexibility tests, and reinstates the Presidential Physical Fitness Award for top performers. In addition, the President's Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition, now chaired by professional golfer Bryson DeChambeau, has been tasked with designing new award criteria and school programmes to incentivize excellence in physical education. For Trump, the decision is not just about health, it's about national character. By reviving a programme steeped in Cold War ethos and competitive spirit, the administration aims to instill discipline, resilience, and what Vice President J.D. Vance called a 'culture of strength.' A divided response The move has drawn mixed reactions. Supporters see it as a long-overdue wake-up call. They argue that a standardized national test can restore accountability in physical education, motivate students, and promote a shared benchmark of health excellence. Secretary Kennedy, who called the award 'a huge item of pride' in his own youth, believes the revived programme can reawaken a culture of active living. But critics warn that the return to percentile rankings and fixed physical benchmarks could alienate students who don't, or physically can't, meet the standards. Mental health advocates caution that such public assessments can heighten performance anxiety and fuel body image issues in increasingly vulnerable age groups. Educators, too, are concerned about implementation logistics and the risk of fostering a punitive environment in the name of fitness. A question of ideology At its core, the debate over the Presidential Fitness Test is about more than push-ups. It's about what America expects from its children, and what it believes schools should teach them. The Obama-era programme privileged equity, customization, and well-being. The Trump revival favors discipline, measurable excellence, and the revival of a competitive, athletic ethos. In many ways, this tug-of-war reflects a deeper philosophical divide, one between public health as empowerment and public health as personal responsibility. And as with so many debates in modern America, the gymnasium has become yet another battlefield in a wider cultural war. Whether this revival will succeed in changing health outcomes, or simply reignite old debates remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: the Presidential Fitness Test is no longer just a measure of physical ability. It's a symbol of who we were, who we are, and who we hope to be. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Don't sweep us under rug': Black man challenges Vivek Ramaswamy on violence, race
At a Cincinnati town hall on Monday, following the viral incident of a White woman's brutal beating, Vivek Ramaswamy faced questioning from an audience member who argued that Black history has been disregarded in American discourse. The Ohio Republican candidate responded by acknowledging the need to face uncomfortable truths while highlighting America's foundation on ideals that it continuously strives to achieve, despite imperfections. The questioner, identified as Robert, expressed his non-partisan stance on US public safety debates but raised concerns about the inadequate inclusion of Black American history in contemporary safety discussions. "You have to understand how our people feel, because we were brought here in slave ships over 400 years ago, and we were treated like animals, like cattle hung on trees, families separated, our heritage taken from us so that we didn't know who we were as a people. Now, I say, you act like this is a new thing. This balance that you see out here," Robert challenged Ramaswamy. "Well, look over the 400 years of all the violence that was perpetrated on our people… You want to sweep our history under the table, but you don't sweep the Ashkenazi Jews with the Hitler thing under the table. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like People Born 1940-1975 With No Life Insurance Could Be Eligible For This Reassured Undo by Taboola by Taboola All the things that you did to the other races of people, you don't sweep that under the table. But when it comes down to the black Negro, we can always sweep what happened to us under the table." Ramswamy candidly added that the question made him a bit "uncomfortable" but said leaders should be expected to answer such difficult questions. "Of course, we're not perfect. In fact, we're destined to never be perfect because we're not a nation comprised of gods, we're a nation comprised of human beings, and we're a nation founded on a set of ideals. So, that means you will always be imperfect," Ramaswamy said in response to the race-conscious question. Using China and Iran as examples, Ramaswamy noted that these nations avoid criticism for hypocrisy because they lack foundational ideals. "Nobody ever criticizes China, or Iran, or whatever for hypocrisy, because to be a hypocritical nation, you have to have ideals in the first place," Ramaswamy said. "I'm not going to say America was perfect for every chapter of our national history. Of course not. We're a nation founded on ideals. We're nation founded on human beings, so we'll always fall short of those ideals," Ramaswamy continued. "But I would rather live in a country that has ideals and falls short of them. Than to live in a country with no ideals at all." While Ramaswamy went on to say that no one's ethnic history should be swept under the rug, he also emphasized that recent events — including last week's viral video showing a brutal public beating in Cincinnati — must not be overlooked. He urged Americans to face uncomfortable truths rather than avoid them. "We have to confront what is true. Not just what makes us comfortable, but precisely when it does not," Ramaswamy said. He expressed preference for a nation with aspirational standards, even if imperfectly achieved. While acknowledging the importance of historical recognition, Ramaswamy emphasised that recent events, including the Cincinnati incident, warrant attention. He concluded by redefining 'our people' as inclusive of all Americans, asserting everyone's right to live without fear of violence. "And may I even say, if you're a hard-working American, to go into your city whether you're black or white without fear of actually being assaulted or battered, that ought to be the birthright of every American. That's what I want for 'our people'," he said.
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
Justice Dipankar Datta had no business questioning Rahul Gandhi's Indianness, says Odisha Congress president Bhakta Charan Das
Odisha Congress president Bhakta Charan Das on Tuesday registered his objection to the observation made by the Supreme Court questioning Rahul Gandhi for his "China occupied Indian territory" remarks. He said that Justice Dipankar Datta had no business to question Gandhi's "Indianness" for merely criticising the Modi government's "failure on Chinese aggression ". Productivity Tool Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide By Metla Sudha Sekhar View Program Finance Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory By Dinesh Nagpal View Program Finance Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code By CA Rahul Gupta View Program Digital Marketing Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel By Neil Patel View Program Finance Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading By Kunal Patel View Program Productivity Tool Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide By Study at home View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program "Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi isn't allowed to question China in Parliament. If he does it on social media, he's asked if he's 'truly Indian'. Justice Dipankar Datta had no business to question Rahul Gandhi's 'Indianness' for criticising the Modi Govt's failure on Chinese aggression," Das posted on X. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Doctors Say Forgetting Names Isn't Normal - That's What's Causing It Memory Search Click Here Undo "His father and grandmother sacrificed their lives for our country. What more proofs of 'Indianness' do they seek?" he added. Moreover, Congress leader and former Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot defended the LoP, saying that he did not divulge any secret when he said that 2,000 km of Indian territory is intruded by the Chinese Army. Live Events "Rahul Gandhi did not divulge any secret. What he stated about intrusion and skirmishes in which 20 soldiers lost their lives is already in the public domain since long. The intrusion to the extent of about 2000km is also reflected in the reliable text on the internet and the Media, including the location of the intrusion," Gehlot said in a post on X. He further said that an activist of Ladakh, Sonam Wangchuk, has also been expressing concern about Chinese incursion into Indian territory. This comes after the Supreme Court pulled up Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over his alleged remarks on the Indian Army after a clash between the Indian and Chinese armies in the Yangsi region of Arunachal Pradesh in 2022. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih expressed disapproval of Gandhi's remarks, saying, "How does he know the Chinese occupied 2000 square kilometres of land?" and added that a true Indian wouldn't say such a thing. Justice Datta said, "How do you get to know that 2000 square kilometres of Indian territory was occupied by China? What is the credible material? If you are a true indian, you would not say this. When there is a conflict across borders... can you say all this?" The bench further asked senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Gandhi, why such statements were not made in Parliament but instead on social media.
