Our country’s economic future is in Ben Bernanke’s hands on a daily basis.

Now his job security is in ours.

I need you to immediately call your senators with a simple message: “No vote on Bernanke until we get a vote on Audit the Fed.”

Senator Mark Warner: 202-224-2023
Senator Jim Webb: 202-224-4024

Here’s what’s going on and why you need to act immediately. It’s a little complex, so bear with me.

Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) has led the charge to place a “hold” on Bernanke’s nomination to a second term as Fed chairman until the Senate votes on Audit the Fed. This means to get a vote on Bernanke, Harry Reid has to have a vote on “cloture” (just like in the health care battle), and that requires a super-majority of 60 votes.

Insiders now tell me that Harry Reid is threatening to ram through a cloture vote as early as next week.

Senator DeMint is joined by David Vitter, Jim Bunning, and Bernie Sanders in his efforts, but these senators cannot succeed alone. But right now, Republicans should stop caving in to Harry Reid’s muscle on behalf of Ben Bernanke and the out of control Federal Reserve, and Democrats are cowering in fear of the popular revolt against out of control spending and the economic wreck it has helped create.

A strong message from Campaign for Liberty activists like you could start a stampede in the Senate that will make Harry Reid back off of Bernanke and give us a vote on Audit the Fed.

After all, Harry Reid is already the most vulnerable Democrat up for reelection next year, according to the polls.

Call your senators at the following numbers:

Senator Mark Warner: 202-224-2023
Senator Jim Webb: 202-224-4024

Ask to speak to a aid

Another phoney issue by the republicans. The indpendence of the FRB is critical...the next thing you know Rush Limbaiugh will be setting policy of them as well.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Yes, the House already passed the audit measures - looks like the Democrats are already moving to strip the Fed of their independence and also to audit them.

Probably not one of the best ideas - although the audit makes sense.

House Strikes at Wall Street
Bill Would Usher in Biggest Change to Finance Regulation Since '30s; Curbs on Fed
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126055726422487665.html

Quote

...
The bill, written in large part by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, aims to fill gaps in the regulatory toolkit exposed by last year's crisis. It would give the government the power to break up even healthy financial companies if regulators believe they pose a threat to the financial system. It will also direct the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to collect $150 billion in fees from big financial institutions to create a fund to pay for future large failures.

Business and banking groups lobbied hard to kill the bill, particularly the consumer agency, which critics charge would have the effect of restricting credit to consumers.

"Certain provisions in the legislation will undermine our shared goal of market stability and reducing systemic risk," said Timothy Ryan, president and chief executive of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, in a written statement. "We believe there can be additional improvements in the Senate," said a spokesman for Bank of America Corp.

"A new agency is just a whole new bureaucracy," J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive James Dimon said Tuesday at an industry conference.

The final vote was 223-202, with 27 Democrats joining unanimous Republican opposition.
...

Seems like the Democrats are pushing reform and audit. So much for the independence of the Federal Reserve.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Vince:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another phoney issue by the republicans. The
> indpendence of the FRB is critical...the next
> thing you know Rush Limbaiugh will be setting
> policy of them as well.


lol!

The Fed already has 5 internal audit programs. The books are already
open to the House and Senate Banking Committee's. This is cosmetic
"feel good" legislation that will not find anything to begin with.
Waste of time.

The financial meltdown was caused by Congressional encouragement of affirmative action in mortgages, backed by Freddie's guarantees, which took virtually all the risk off the shoulders of bankers issuing the ill-advised mortgages, thus encouraging them to act recklessly (this was driven mainly by Democrats, but Bush went along for the ride and to some extent encouraged it).

+ the conflict of interest in the bond rating agencies (Moody's etc) that was the product of a Congressional change in the law in the 1970s that permitted bankers, etc, to pay fees directly to the rating agencies for those services.

+ lax oversight of new financial instruments, built on artificially inflated bond ratings, that ended up poisoning both the US and the world financial markets (SEC dropped the ball here).

The Fed should have been more perspicuous in perceiving all the foregoing; they allowed the pot to continue simmering by jiggering interest rates; in short, they went along for the ride; but going after the Fed Reserve in this fashion really does not address any of the fundamental systemic problems that led to the financial meltdown.

Sigh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The financial meltdown was caused by Congressional
> encouragement of affirmative action in mortgages,
> backed by Freddie's guarantees, which took
> virtually all the risk off the shoulders of
> bankers issuing the ill-advised mortgages, thus
> encouraging them to act recklessly (this was
> driven mainly by Democrats, but Bush went along
> for the ride and to some extent encouraged it).
>
> + the conflict of interest in the bond rating
> agencies (Moody's etc) that was the product of a
> Congressional change in the law in the 1970s that
> permitted bankers, etc, to pay fees directly to
> the rating agencies for those services.
>
> + lax oversight of new financial instruments,
> built on artificially inflated bond ratings, that
> ended up poisoning both the US and the world
> financial markets (SEC dropped the ball here).
>
> The Fed should have been more perspicuous in
> perceiving all the foregoing; they allowed the pot
> to continue simmering by jiggering interest rates;
> in short, they went along for the ride; but going
> after the Fed Reserve in this fashion really does
> not address any of the fundamental systemic
> problems that led to the financial meltdown.


Putting Ayn Rand loving republicans in charge of FRB was the problem.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another phoney issue by the republicans.

This, of course, explains why Bernie Sanders supports the effort of Demint, right?

Of course, as a disclaimer, I realize that my opinion above is just that, an opinion, where, in no way, shape or form is this allegation of cause supported by any scientific evidence and was contrived by the thought-process of my pea-sized brain. Really, the problem lies in the private sector where the proper checks were not in place with respect to underwriting and default reserves.

Please excuse my intellectual impotence.

Fake Sigh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Really, the problem lies in the private
> sector where the proper checks were not in place
> with respect to underwriting and default reserves.


And why was that?

Because the affirmative action mortgages were guaranteed by Freddie.

Why worry about proper underwriting and reserves when you know you will profit by issuing the ill-advised mortgages, with little-to-no chance that your bad underwriting decision will come back to bite you in the ass?

[Whatever, but you might use a different handle to respond, for the sake of clarity, if you're actually interested in debating this, rather than simply trolling.]

To say that affirmative action mortgages were the underlying cause of the financial crisis clearly displays a biased viewpoint when no single independent authority has placed blame on any one single risk factor. I could buy that it was a contributing factor, yes. But exclusively? No. The lone characteristic that would apply to either side here is GREED.