It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A House panel on Tuesday approved legislation that would let a government watchdog audit the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy decisions, a move bitterly opposed by the central bank.
“This bill would open the floodgates to political interference in monetary-policy making,” said Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat from the District of Columbia.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat from New York, said the measure would lead to higher interest rates because it would undermine the market’s confidence in the independence of the central bank.
Republicans said the measure was needed to rein in the Fed.
“It is ironic that the arsonists that caused the financial collapse are now being given credit...for putting out the fire. Almost every macroeconomist concedes in retrospect that [the Fed’s] extended period of easy money led to the financial crisis,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky.
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: eisegesis
i think it's a fine idea... but, whose to say that the fed doesn't have two sets of books. one that balances out and one that their bosses get to see.
i mean people been bitchin about auditing them since almost from the get go, be foolish to think that they would keep only one set of books that shows the true deal of they have going.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: eisegesis
i think it's a fine idea... but, whose to say that the fed doesn't have two sets of books. one that balances out and one that their bosses get to see.
i mean people been bitchin about auditing them since almost from the get go, be foolish to think that they would keep only one set of books that shows the true deal of they have going.
How do we trust the auditor?
Maybe it will be Nunes.
originally posted by: eisegesis
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: eisegesis
i think it's a fine idea... but, whose to say that the fed doesn't have two sets of books. one that balances out and one that their bosses get to see.
i mean people been bitchin about auditing them since almost from the get go, be foolish to think that they would keep only one set of books that shows the true deal of they have going.
How do we trust the auditor?
Maybe it will be Nunes.
Seriously?
Why should we have trusted a third party to audit the Clinton's server?
Anyway, you certainly have demonstrated one thing, the bill would open the floodgates to "political interference," by people who can't seem to trust others before given a reason not to. The Federal Reserve is already corrupt, so what does America have to lose?