Audit The Fed, Then End It!

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I have been very pleased with the progress of my legislation, HR 1207, which calls for a complete audit of the Federal Reserve and removes many significant barriers towards transparency of our monetary system. This bill now has nearly 170 cosponsors, with support from both Republicans and Democrats. Senator Bernie Sanders has introduced a companion bill in the Senate S 604, which will hopefully begin to gain momentum as well. I am very encouraged to see so many of my colleagues in Congress stand with me for greater transparency in government.

Some have begun to push back against this bill, and I am very happy to address their concerns.

Congressman Ron Paul - Audit the Fed, Then End It! - Texas Straight Talk

 

[sealybobo]

I have been very pleased with the progress of my legislation, HR 1207, which calls for a complete audit of the Federal Reserve and removes many significant barriers towards transparency of our monetary system. This bill now has nearly 170 cosponsors, with support from both Republicans and Democrats. Senator Bernie Sanders has introduced a companion bill in the Senate S 604, which will hopefully begin to gain momentum as well. I am very encouraged to see so many of my colleagues in Congress stand with me for greater transparency in government.

Some have begun to push back against this bill, and I am very happy to address their concerns.

Congressman Ron Paul - Audit the Fed, Then End It! - Texas Straight Talk

Even though you argue with me about why we need to end the Fed, I'm glad you see that it is a good idea regardless.

 

[Paulie]

I'm actually pretty damn surprised that 1/5 of Congress has signed on to this.

Now if the PEOPLE would do their part in demanding action from their reps, we could get this thing a LOT more co-sponsors.

I'll personally wait until American Idol is over this week, though. I can't put my energy into anything else right now, I'm just so damn excited to see who wins!

 

[Iriemon]

This Bill is a misnomer in the classic Orwellian style.

The Fed is already audited every since year by both a Congressional agency (GAO) and a big four accounting firm.

This bill is about forcing Fed Board deliberations on money policy to be public, which IMO is not a good idea because it chills the ability of board members to speak openly and frankly and politicizes FRB deliberations and votes.

If you think ending the Fed and giving Congress power over the money supply would be a good idea, by all means support the bill. Its a step in that direction.

 

[sealybobo]

I'm actually pretty damn surprised that 1/5 of Congress has signed on to this.

Now if the PEOPLE would do their part in demanding action from their reps, we could get this thing a LOT more co-sponsors.

I'll personally wait until American Idol is over this week, though. I can't put my energy into anything else right now, I'm just so damn excited to see who wins!

Yes. And, I got an email from Democrats.com asking to BREAK UP THE BANKS.

I think this is catching steam!!!

But you are right. This is where the bankers call in their favors and the politicians fake like they are listening and then ultimately they don't fix the root of the problem.

Like last year when we asked for immigration reform. They passed a bill, cost about a billion dollars, and ultimately, the borders are still open. Maybe not as open as they were, but open enough that we really aren't safe from terrorists coming in if they want.

And certainly illegal workers are coming in still.

I read a story last year where the mexican border is how/where chinese illegals come in too. So its not just the hispanics that are ruining this country.

 

[Paulie]

This Bill is a misnomer in the classic Orwellian style.

The Fed is already audited every since year by both a Congressional agency (GAO) and a big four accounting firm.

This bill is about forcing Fed Board deliberations on money policy to be public, which IMO is not a good idea because it chills the ability of board members to speak openly and frankly and politicizes FRB deliberations and votes.

If you think ending the Fed and giving Congress power over the money supply would be a good idea, by all means support the bill. Its a step in that direction.

Just so we're clear, Paul would never advocate Congress controlling the money supply. That's Hamiltonian, and not even CLOSE to what Paul supports.

Paul would leave that up to the market and the market ONLY. You can disagree with that all you want, but let's at least be clear about what we're talking about.

For as much criticism of Paul as you give, you don't seem to know very much about him. Perhaps you should read up before commenting? This at least the third time I've seen you get it wrong on Paul.

ETA: If you mean Congress coining money and regulating the value thereof, then that's different. Although, that's explicitly what the constitution states. If you mean establishing a central bank under congressional control, then that's absolutely NOT what Paul supports.

 

[Iriemon]

This Bill is a misnomer in the classic Orwellian style.

The Fed is already audited every since year by both a Congressional agency (GAO) and a big four accounting firm.

This bill is about forcing Fed Board deliberations on money policy to be public, which IMO is not a good idea because it chills the ability of board members to speak openly and frankly and politicizes FRB deliberations and votes.

If you think ending the Fed and giving Congress power over the money supply would be a good idea, by all means support the bill. Its a step in that direction.

Just so we're clear, Paul would never advocate Congress controlling the money supply. That's Hamiltonian, and not even CLOSE to what Paul supports.

Yeah, I read his page. I'm not sure what Paul supports, he uses "free market" terminology but doesn't explain what that means. Dollar backed gold standard? If there is no Fed how is the money supply controlled? By market money issuers? Private banks? And he's concerned about the influence the private banks have now?

Paul would leave that up to the market and the market ONLY. You can disagree with that all you want, but let's at least be clear about what we're talking about.

Which means what? Private banks control it?

For as much criticism of Paul as you give, you don't seem to know very much about him. Perhaps you should read up before commenting? This at least the third time I've seen you get it wrong on Paul.

ETA: If you mean Congress coining money and regulating the value thereof, then that's different. Although, that's explicitly what the constitution states. If you mean establishing a central bank under congressional control, then that's absolutely NOT what Paul supports.

If the Fed is eliminated, you need some institution to be in control of it. Since Paul was criticizing the influence of private banks in the money supply, I would be surprised that he'd want them to control it. Therefore the logical deduction is that Congress has this authority. But I read that isn't what he wants either. So I guess he does want private banks controlling it.

Maybe you can cite me to a web page that lays out in detail Paul's proposal for control of the money supply so I can be informed. Thanks.

 

[Iriemon]

I'm actually pretty damn surprised that 1/5 of Congress has signed on to this.

Now if the PEOPLE would do their part in demanding action from their reps, we could get this thing a LOT more co-sponsors.

I'll personally wait until American Idol is over this week, though. I can't put my energy into anything else right now, I'm just so damn excited to see who wins!

Yes. And, I got an email from Democrats.com asking to BREAK UP THE BANKS.

I think this is catching steam!!!

But you are right. This is where the bankers call in their favors and the politicians fake like they are listening and then ultimately they don't fix the root of the problem.

Like last year when we asked for immigration reform. They passed a bill, cost about a billion dollars, and ultimately, the borders are still open. Maybe not as open as they were, but open enough that we really aren't safe from terrorists coming in if they want.

And certainly illegal workers are coming in still.

I read a story last year where the mexican border is how/where chinese illegals come in too. So its not just the hispanics that are ruining this country.

Are you in favor of the "free market" plan which give private banks complete control of the money supply instead of a government agency?

 

[Paulie]

Iriemon, the money supply doesn't need to be "controlled". Congress was originally supposed to coin the money and regulate the value based on weights and measures of gold. Remember when an ounce of gold was fixed at $35?

Beyond that, the constitution doesn't go very much further in detail. So establishing a central bank of ANY type would require an amendment, because the constitution doesn't specifically state that congress has the power to establish a bank. You give me the amendment, get it passed, and I'll agree with it. Anything short is illegal as far as I'm concerned.

And no, private banks don't need to control the money supply. We as the people control it based on our demand, and the supply of available money. We've had the discussion already about gold standards. Gold supplies increase around ~2% per year. That's PLENTY of inflation. We don't need anymore than that. Savers are getting PUNISHED for being responsible with their money, and frankly, that's fucking ridiculous.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

This Bill is a misnomer in the classic Orwellian style.

The Fed is already audited every since year by both a Congressional agency (GAO) and a big four accounting firm.

This bill is about forcing Fed Board deliberations on money policy to be public, which IMO is not a good idea because it chills the ability of board members to speak openly and frankly and politicizes FRB deliberations and votes.

If you think ending the Fed and giving Congress power over the money supply would be a good idea, by all means support the bill. Its a step in that direction.

It's our money they're spending and debasing, so yes I think we have a right to know what they're doing.

 

[Paulie]

This Bill is a misnomer in the classic Orwellian style.

The Fed is already audited every since year by both a Congressional agency (GAO) and a big four accounting firm.

This bill is about forcing Fed Board deliberations on money policy to be public, which IMO is not a good idea because it chills the ability of board members to speak openly and frankly and politicizes FRB deliberations and votes.

If you think ending the Fed and giving Congress power over the money supply would be a good idea, by all means support the bill. Its a step in that direction.

It's our money they're spending and debasing, so yes I think we have a right to know what they're doing.

Yeah it really astonishes me that people would rather NOT know what's going on. Our elected reps are supposed to be acting on our BEHALF, which means we have a DUTY to be informed so that we can demand the proper action from said reps.

To rather not know is just absurd. If you'd rather not know, you might as well not even vote.

 

[Iriemon]

This Bill is a misnomer in the classic Orwellian style.

The Fed is already audited every since year by both a Congressional agency (GAO) and a big four accounting firm.

This bill is about forcing Fed Board deliberations on money policy to be public, which IMO is not a good idea because it chills the ability of board members to speak openly and frankly and politicizes FRB deliberations and votes.

If you think ending the Fed and giving Congress power over the money supply would be a good idea, by all means support the bill. Its a step in that direction.

It's our money they're spending and debasing, so yes I think we have a right to know what they're doing.

Yeah it really astonishes me that people would rather NOT know what's going on. Our elected reps are supposed to be acting on our BEHALF, which means we have a DUTY to be informed so that we can demand the proper action from said reps.

To rather not know is just absurd. If you'd rather not know, you might as well not even vote.

I'm not saying the Fed shouldn't have to account for what monies it loans or backs. That is why it is audited.

And I see your point. However, the markets, being the emotionally creatures they are to a large extent, react mightily to even the Fed's prepared statements. Things that are said in informal discussions could have severe, and negative, impacts on the economy. The result is that the Board members will not be able to express their views and opnions about appropriate money policy freely. I don't think that is a good thing.

For the same reason I don't think that government deliberations on national security should be open either. You can say that we have the right to know, that our elected reps are supposed to be acting on our BEHALF, which means we have a DUTY to be informed so that we can demand the proper action from said reps. But the fear of divulging secrets would mean that such discussions could not be held openly -- people would be afraid to voice their true opinions. That is not the best way to make policy.

 

[sealybobo]

This Bill is a misnomer in the classic Orwellian style.

The Fed is already audited every since year by both a Congressional agency (GAO) and a big four accounting firm.

This bill is about forcing Fed Board deliberations on money policy to be public, which IMO is not a good idea because it chills the ability of board members to speak openly and frankly and politicizes FRB deliberations and votes.

If you think ending the Fed and giving Congress power over the money supply would be a good idea, by all means support the bill. Its a step in that direction.

It's our money they're spending and debasing, so yes I think we have a right to know what they're doing.

Hi Kevin. I was just listening to Thom Hartmann. He has Bernie Sanders on every Friday. A caller said that there is a law that the Federal Reserve can give as much money as they want to the banks and no oversite. I forgot the number of the bill/law. I'll try to find it. HR somethingsomething. Anyways, Bernie Sanders said he has collaborated with Ron Paul on dealing with the Federal Reserve.

He said the Fed, without going through Congress, gave the bankers an additional 2 trillion dollars. When they asked Paulson who they gave the money to, he said he could not tell them because it would cause harm to the banks that got the money.

TWO TRILLION!!! And we're crying over $750 billion!!!

If this doesn't prove we need to end the Federal Reserve, or nationalize it, nothing will.

Why Won't the Federal Reserve Say Who They Gave $2 Trillion To?

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/106443/why_won't_the_federal_reserve_say_who_they_gave_$2_trillion_to/