Is this what the government calls: "Accountability?" Apparently, leading Republicans
and Democrats are indicating that's the case.
There it was (and still is as I write this), buried near the bottom of this morning's Bloomberg.com "Breaking News" list of stories: Fed Defies Transparency Aim in Refusal to Disclose.
Jerome a Paris has a great diary, Can Obama Stop The Looting Before It's Too Late?, currently on the Rec List here, which covers much of what I'm writing about here, but my focus is on one item, in particular: The $2 trillion in Fed funds that is totally unaccounted for right now! Never mind public disclosure, but House Financial Services Committee Chair Barney Frank doesn't even know where it went!
Fed Defies Transparency Aim in Refusal to Disclose
By Mark Pittman, Bob Ivry and Alison Fitzgerald
Nov. 10 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve is refusing to identify the recipients of almost $2 trillion of emergency loans from American taxpayers or the troubled assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.
Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said in September they would comply with congressional demands for transparency in a $700 billion bailout of the banking system. Two months later, as the Fed lends far more than that in separate rescue programs that didn't require approval by Congress, Americans have no idea where their money is going or what securities the banks are pledging in return.
"The collateral is not being adequately disclosed, and that's a big problem,'' said Dan Fuss, vice chairman of Boston- based Loomis Sayles & Co., where he co-manages $17 billion in bonds. "In a liquid market, this wouldn't matter, but we're not. The market is very nervous and very thin.''
The story continues to describe how Bloomberg News is now filing a federal lawsuit seeking to force disclosure.
"It's your money; it's not the Fed's money,'' said billionaire Ted Forstmann, senior partner of Forstmann Little & Co. in New York. ``Of course there should be transparency.''
When reached for comment, House Financial Services committee Chairman Barney Frank supported the lack of public disclosure.
I'm sorry, but there comes a time--like right now--when matters seem so totally out of hand, that the one thing we need above all else is disclosure!
In today's news, alone:
Remember that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout from early September that was only going to cost taxpayers $25 billion? Today, Fannie Mae reported a $29 billion writedown loss in the third quarter, alone! Fannie Mae Reports Record Loss After Asset Writedowns. At best, this takeover of Fannie and Freddie will cost taxpayers many hundreds of billions of dollars.
And, then there's the cost of th collapse of insurance behemoth A.I.G. We were told in mid-September that the taxpayer's price tag on this was roughly $89 billion. Today, at the top of the Bloomberg "Breaking Story" list we have this little gem: AIG Gets Expanded Bailout, Posts $24.5 Billion Loss. The story goes on to explain that the A.I.G. bailout is now in the $150-billion range, or almost twice what was reported less than 60 days ago.
It is self-evident that our so-called "$700 billion" bailout will easily extend into the $4- to $5-trillion range, as deflation continues to grip our economy in coming months.
I won't provide links here, so you'll just have to take my word for it (hey if you'll believe our government's credibility on these matters so critical to your grandchildren's future I don't think it's too much to ask to just Google the following for verification), but there are also stories in today's financial press relating to the following:
--Circuit City files Chapter 11.
--GM's stock, according to analysts, is projected to be at $0.00--this isn't a typo--in coming months.
--And, 30% of all hedge funds will shut their doors in the next few months, amounting to tens of trillions of dollars in paper writeoffs.
Many of our nation's leading economists say things are going to get worse in coming months. And, I definitely don't doubt it. But, as Washington pillages our grandchildren's future, is it too much to ask: "Where's it being spent?"
I totally understand why full public disclosure of exactly which financial institutions have received these funds might not be appropriate, but not even Barney Frank has a clue where the money went!
I guess questioning why their projections are so far off, just days after they received over a trillion dollars (what appears, in reality, to be $4 to $5 trillion) in new taxpayer commitments would be too much to ask.
Whatever happened to the calls for transparency and disclosure in our government? If not right now, when?