Skip to main content

Rand Paul
Caricature by DonkeyHotey
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky is putting a hold on President Obama’s nomination of Janet Yellen to chair the Federal Reserve in order to secure a vote on his "transparency" bill that would require a deep audit of the Fed. He's joining with the Campaign for Liberty, an organization chaired by his father, the former Republican Rep. Ron Paul of Texas in this project.

The Sunshine State News reports:

On Thursday, the Campaign for Liberty announced a video on the subject featuring Sen. Paul and John Tate, the president of the group.

“The Senate fight over Barack Obama's Fed chair nominee is just around the corner,” Norm Singleton, the vice president of policy for the Campaign for Liberty, wrote supporters on Thursday. “And Senator Rand Paul has vowed to block the nomination until Harry Reid brings ‘Audit the Fed’ to the floor for a vote. This will be the fight of our lives—but this is our moment!

Singleton insisted the video “has the banksters trembling in fear.”

Sen. Paul plans to formally impose the hold next week when the Senate comes back into session.

Paul's bill—the Federal Reserve Transparency Act (known as the "Audit the Fed" bill)—would eliminate restrictions on the Government Accountability Office's audits of the Fed and put its credit facilities, securities purchases, and quantitative easing activities under congressional oversight. The bill has 18 co-sponsors, including Democratic Sen. Mark Begich of Alaska. A companion bill in the House, introduced by Republican Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, has 157 co-sponsors, including 13 Democrats.

In an opinion piece in Time magazine Oct. 11, Sen. Paul wrote:

It is also important to focus on the fact that the Federal Reserve is structurally flawed. The institution needs to be reformed to prevent Yellen, or any other future nominee, from using the enormous power of the Fed to aid and abet the allies of big government.  I intend on using the Senate’s constitutional power of consent to nominations as a means to educate the American people on the structural flaws and policies of the Fed that are bankrupting our nation.

The Fed’s favored practice of “quantitative easing” has been questionable at best. One need not be an economist or mathematician to wonder whether printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy. Still, as The Washington Post’s Neil Irwin notes, “Yellen has been not merely an engineer of the Fed’s policies of ‘quantitative easing’ and ‘forward guidance,’ but a consistent voice within the central bank to go further.”

To pave the way to confirmation, Yellen has planned meetings with senators in the coming weeks to make her case. She's initially meet with members of the Senate Banking Committee, the committee that will hold hearings before sending her nomination to the full Senate.

According to Kevin Cirilli, Yellen already has set up meetings with Republican Sens. Richard Shelby of Alabama and Dean Heller of Nevada, as well as Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Jon Tester of Montana, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Jeff Merkley of Oregon.

Originally posted to Meteor Blades on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:04 AM PDT.

Also republished by My Old Kentucky Kos and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  That will help the R brand with wome, not. (28+ / 0-)

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:05:48 AM PDT

    •  Why would women care? (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dburn, patbahn, gjohnsit, miasmo, hmi, duhban

      There's no evidence this is a sexist thing.

      Are you suggesting that women will dislike Rand Paul based solely on the fact that he held up the nomination of a female candidate?

      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

      by Sparhawk on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:18:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, why would women care about (29+ / 0-)

        the first women head of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Banks?

        As a political matter, it just adds to the bad image of the Rs.  

        Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

        by TomP on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:26:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  yes it does, proceed Senator asshat....nt (8+ / 0-)

          "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

          by merrywidow on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:49:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Actually Fed transparency is a very liberal goal. (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            hmi, cruz, sij, Johnny Q

            Why do we want the US money supply determined by a bunch of rich bankers operating in secret? How is that in any way "progressive"? If only Democrats would play hardball in order to fight for progressive principles. Pretty pathetic when a teabagger like Paul is the only one.

            And there is no reason to assume this is motivated by sexism. Paul has been pretty consistent on this specific Fed issue. By all means call out sexism when you see it, but you lose credibility when you throw the accusation around without merit.

        •  you're kidding right? (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sparhawk, Selphinea, KittyPawFive, duhban

          This is an ideological thing. He wants to end QE because he doesn't understand it and no matter who the nominee was, Paul Ryan would be going this route.  

          Don't turn this into another circlejerk when there's real issues at play here.

          •  Rand's motives are irrelevant to the (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Old Sailor, Selphinea, gjohnsit

            image he creates.  As for "circlejerks," what do you have against masturbation?

            Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

            by TomP on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:22:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I didn't really see sexism here at all. (0+ / 0-)

              I'm familiar with the Pauls, though, so I already knew this wasn't about Yellen. You do have a point.

              Patriotism is another word for nationalism. Nationalism is another word for bigotry.

              by Selphinea on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:32:51 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I never said it was sexist. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Selphinea, worldlotus

                I said it will be percevied as sexist by some.  It adds to the image of Rs as anti-woman.   That may not be fair, but I don't care about being fair to a racist (and sexist and homophobic and classist pig) like Rand paul even if his motives may not be sexist in thsi instance.  It looks sexist.  

                Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

                by TomP on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:35:13 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  He wants to end QE because it's helping keeping (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            leevank, duhban

            the economy from failing and he and GOP soooo want Obama and economy to fail.

            •  So the Fed should operate in secret (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              hmi, fb, gjohnsit

              because us peasants are too stupid to understand monetary policy? If you don't think working class people are intellectually capable of deciding what is the best policy if they are given all the relevant info, you are a true conservative.

              Exposing how the Fed is substituting possibly marginally effective trickle down monetary stimulus for way more effective and beneficial fiscal stimulus could educate people to realize that all this money being put into circulation is not causing unacceptable levels of inflation. And then maybe they will question the whole bogus framing of deficits that is used to block the treasury from spending more money directly on infrastructure, clean energy, education, healthcare, jobs, etc.

              •  The Fed can clearly implement monetary stimulus (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Eric Nelson, akmk, chuck utzman

                How do you suggest that the Fed implement fiscal stimulus when it doesn't control both the House and the Senate?  The question is whether it's monetary stimulus or no stimulus at all.

                Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

                by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:43:21 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Congress can implement fiscal stimulus (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  fb, gjohnsit

                  Hopefully, an audit will educate more people to the fact that blocking fiscal stimulus is resulting in less efficient monetary stimulus from the Fed. An audit cannot stop the Fed from doing QE, but it can expose any corruption and cronyism involved, and actually refute the point that Paul is trying to make that stimulus is a big disaster that is about to cause hyperinflation. Educating the public is the best way forward. Keeping them in the dark for their own good is classic conservatism and sucks.

            •  QE is helping the wealthy (0+ / 0-)

              As for the rest of us, it trickles down. If you know what I mean.

              None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

              by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 03:21:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  He may (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Meteor Blades, fb

            and I emphasize the word may, want to end it because he doesn't like it, doesn't understand it, whatever.

            But holding up someone's nomination is not the way to go about making the change.  He's just being an obstructionist.

        •  Because they care more about policy (0+ / 0-)

          than a person's private bits?

          Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

          by The Dead Man on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:27:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I would bet... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sparhawk

          one of my thumbs that if you surveyed 100 women and asked them the top 10 things they cared about, not a single one would say having a woman chair of the Federal Reserve.

      •  Depends on how it's framed. (6+ / 0-)

        We could say,

        "Republicans never wanted oversight over the Fed until a WOMAN got to run it!"

        This would be true. But I hope we don't go that route.

        The correct thing to do is to support Rand Paul's measure. The Fed should be under tight governmental control and the Fed should be more transparent.

        Even a broken clock is right once a day.

        •  except His Dad pushed the first ever Fed Audit (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          merrily1000, hmi, Johnny Q

          bill, back in 2008,  and it was a one time only thing
          and required the GAO only look at certain funding vehicles
          and sit on the report for 24 months.

          The Fed should be audited "JUST LIKE ANY BANK"
          and held to the same level of certainty and visibility
          that GAAP would call for and a publically chartered
          institution would.

          The only prior fed audit showed the wives of major bank CEOs to be the most clever investors in the history of
          finance.

          •  If Rand Paul or any other GOP has a good idea (0+ / 0-)

            they can put it forth without another gun to the head.

            Obviously, they are so desperate, they will resort to anything, but actual good ideas.

            If this is a good idea, holding up Yellen appointment totally stupid.

            •  it's actually a very good idea (0+ / 0-)

              Everyone wants to put in a new fed chair, so tying
              a commitment to a bill that would otherwise get
              marshmallowed to death is a very good idea.

              Hey, if Sen Reid floors the Fed Audit bill, and
              gives it an open vote, then, yellen could get
              her nomination floored right after that.

          •  With the last (and first) audit,,, (0+ / 0-)

            Sen Bernie Sanders sponsored the Sen version. It will be interesting to see who else signs on to this.
            Again, you just have to wonder why people who don't know  a damn thing about economics are allowed to make policy decisions about big, complex  issues.

            What do we want? Universal health care! When do we want it? Now!

            by cagernant on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:55:07 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Federal Reserve is already audited (0+ / 0-)

            You can read the reports:

            http://www.federalreserve.gov/...

            and

            http://www.federalreserve.gov/...

            and I don't get the talk about money printing.  The Fed has gotten value for value in all of its asset purchases.  The bond assets are still on its balance sheet and will eventually be sold or mature and the Fed will get its money back with interest.  This is why QE has not resulted in inflation.

            "Ruling the country is like cooking a small fish." -- Lao Tzu

            by DanielMN on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 02:52:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  what does wikipedia say? (0+ / 0-)

              https://en.wikipedia.org/...

              The Federal Reserve states that "the financial statements of the Federal Reserve Banks and the Board of Governors are audited annually by an independent outside auditor."[6] The bill's sponsor, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), counters by stating that the present audit process exempts the Fed's "most crucial activities".[7]
              The two titles for these two versions of the bill are not to be confused with the same two titles (used in reverse) for the two versions of a related bill. The House "Federal Reserve Sunshine Act of 2009" by Paul (H.R. 1348), and the Senate "Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009" by Sanders (S. 513), require the Federal Reserve to publish information on financial assistance provided to various entities during the 2008 bailout. This bill creates a website listing all banks that have borrowed from the Fed since March 24, 2008, and the amount, terms, and "specific rationale" of the loans. Sanders commented, "I have a hard time understanding how you have put $2.2 trillion at risk without making those names available." Fed chair Ben Bernanke had told Sanders that publishing the names would make the banks feel stigmatized and potentially reluctant to borrow further.[4]
              sorry, the fed fights all attempts to do a transparent audit,
            •  you confuse cause and goal (0+ / 0-)

              The Fed has gotten value by shafting everyone with a savings account.

              The goal  was about trying to solve the solvency crisis
              of the banks by giving them free money

              that they then turned around and arbitraged that against
              30 year T Bills is both illegal and bad policy.

      •  I am suggesting that no one will like Rand Paul (6+ / 0-)

        because he does not know how to pass a bill but only STOP, BLOCK and QUIT. He needs to leave DC.

        PS Read on, there is currently a bill in progress to audit the fed. Rand can't be bothered when there is a hostage.

        ________

        Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

        by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:51:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think he meant "some" not "women" n/t (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TomP
      •  Women probably care a lot about the economy and (0+ / 0-)

        Janet Yellen is a good choice.

  •  To play Devil's Advocate (20+ / 0-)

    1) There is at least a connection between Fed Chair and Fed Audit, and
    2) An audit of the Federal Reserve is not an unreasonable ask

    I just wish the job wasn't so important. It's not a position to leave open for long, and the Senate moves at glacial speed.

    I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

    by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:08:58 AM PDT

    •  89 Democrats Vote to Audit the Fed, PASSES HOUSE. (7+ / 0-)

      From an earlier DKos diary....

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. www.hamiltonproject.org

      by PatriciaVa on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:13:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Obviously there is not enough votes in the Senate (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        highacidity, akmk, duhban

        so Rand needs to STOP, BLOCK, HOLD HOSTAGE, and QUIT.

        _______

        Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

        by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:52:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  this is actually rational hostage taking. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Dead Man, Selphinea, hmi, ammasdarling

          the Senate used to hold nominees to certain
          reasonable policy goals.

          Head of nuclear was held up pending a report on
          nuclear strategy a few years back, they then used the
          report to discuss his policy goals.

          •  How about just propose an idea without hostage (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            88kathy, fb

            taking?

          •  It's not Communism, Socialism, Fascism or (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            duhban

            Democracy,

            It's THUGISM.

            ____

            Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

            by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:48:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  no such animal... (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fb, patbahn, duhban, Icicle68

            We cannot allow either "rational" hostage taking or irrational hostage taking.  Hostage taking is an act of desperation and it is quite probably illegal, and as such it can never be considered rational.  

            What we must insist upon are (a) clean bills for each and every desired measure and (b) the end of hostage taking.  We simply cannot afford to allow a single member of Congress or a small group of members to block bills any time someone wants to make a point.  

            There is already too much foot-dragging in Congress even when most of our representatives attempt to engage in reasonable back-and-forth discussions. Imagine how much would get done if each member of Congress decided, simultaneously, to stage hostage taking to get consideration of one or several items on his or her agenda.  

            Perhaps if we unplug the television cameras the next time Mr. Cruz or Mr. Paul (or anyone else) decides to skip procedures and bring everything to a halt simply to "educate people" or for whatever lame excuse comes to mind, we can eliminate some of the unnecessary, crippling stall tactics we've seen way too much of in recent times.  Perhaps if we declared that no hostage taker can either accept campaign contributions for the six months following a take-over attempt or appear on cable television for the same period, we can eliminate some more.  

            Perhaps we can finally see some meaningful legislation enacted.

    •  The Federal Reserve needs independence (19+ / 0-)

      As much as I dislike the power the Federal Reserve has, they literally saved the worlds economy back in 2008-09.  Could they have done what they did if Rand Paul and his hostage taking Tea Bagging gangsters had the Fed chief in front of a committee where he could threaten them with another audit.

      Half the Feds abilities are in building expectations of what they're going to do, and that would be destroyed if the results, or lies about audits were being spilled on a daily bases.

      •  Re (10+ / 0-)
        they literally saved the worlds economy back in 2008-09
        Lol, saved it from a problem they created.

        And it was only able to be "saved" by running up truly hideous national debts.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:20:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Both false (29+ / 0-)

          Problem 100% created by Wall Street, not the Fed. 100%. No Fed involvement at all.

          The Federal Reserves balance sheet is not part of the government balance sheet.

          I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

          by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:22:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A driving force to the housing bubble was the (7+ / 0-)

            extremely low mortgage interest rates.  The important price of a house is what the monthly payment is.  Having the lowest interest rates for mortgages in the history of the Fed did a great deal to cause the bubble.

            In addition, the Fed did not oppose mortgage lending with near zero owner equity, a radical change from the historic policy of 20% equity or 10% equity with mortgage insurance.  This allowed many people who did not have the financial strength to reasonably buy a house to buy.  This further expanded the bubble and made the market fragile due to the low equity position of many homeowners.

            The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

            by nextstep on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:32:04 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not at all (21+ / 0-)

              The mortgage bubble was driven by the fact that people no longer cared if the mortgage could be serviced AT ALL - because Wall Street had created an insatiable appetite for CDO. That's why Countrywide and WAMU were writing mortgages as fast as they could without doing any income verification. That's why some audits indicated nearly 100% rates of fraud on some CDO tranches, with 90% of the fraud committed by the originator.

              Compared to the derivatives, everything else was secondary. Freddie Mac? Fannie Mae? Interest rates?

              All trivially unimportant by comparison.

              I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

              by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:41:21 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Without Fannie and Freddie... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gjohnsit, hmi

                ...there wouldn't have been giant GSEs around to buy these fraudulent loans. The magnitude of the problem would be cut dramatically.

                (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                by Sparhawk on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:45:39 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  But why was there that appetite? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sparhawk, gjohnsit, nextstep

                It was driven in some part, large or small, by a demand for yield.  Interest rates were so low that people were willing to take on stupid amounts of risk to get higher yields, and subprime mortgage CDOs and MBSs had the sort of yields that investors wanted.

                •  I don't think low interest rates cause greed (0+ / 0-)

                  The demand for yield would exist regardless of rates. Had yields been 5x what they were, but still 0.01% less than that of the CDOs, there would have been money flowing into CDOs.

                  I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

                  by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:24:38 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  The appetite for CDOs came from Fed forced (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gjohnsit, hmi

                low interest rates.  Without the Fed driven low interest rates investors would have no interest in relatively low interest rates from CDOs.  

                Most of the low quality mortgages were either owned or guarantteed by Federal GSEs Fannie, Freddie, FHA and Ginnie Mae.

                The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                by nextstep on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:49:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  See above (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  chuck utzman

                  Low interest rates don't cause greed. Wall Street flows capital to maximum return - full stop.

                  I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

                  by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:25:24 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That's not the whole story (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    nextstep, Sparhawk
                    Low interest rates don't cause greed.
                    But they do encourage greater risk-taking (i.e. speculation).
                       Consider bonds yields. Yields are directly inverse to risk. Low yields (i.e. interest rates) means low risk.
                      Artificially pushing down interest rates leads directly to more speculation.
                      That's just the way it is.

                    None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                    by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 03:26:08 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Not true! (0+ / 0-)

                  You say:

                  Most of the low quality mortgages were either owned or guarantteed by Federal GSEs Fannie, Freddie, FHA and Ginnie Mae.
                  From everything I've read, this is simply untrue.  For example, see the following:
                  Between 2004 and 2006, when subprime lending was exploding, Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48 percent of the subprime loans that were sold into the secondary market to holding about 24 percent, according to data from Inside Mortgage Finance, a specialty publication. One reason is that Fannie and Freddie were subject to tougher standards than many of the unregulated players in the private sector who weakened lending standards, most of whom have gone bankrupt or are now in deep trouble.

                  During those same explosive three years, private investment banks — not Fannie and Freddie — dominated the mortgage loans that were packaged and sold into the secondary mortgage market. In 2005 and 2006, the private sector securitized almost two thirds of all U.S. mortgages, supplanting Fannie and Freddie, according to a number of specialty publications that track this data.
                   

                  http://www.mcclatchydc.com/...

                  See also the report of the

                  Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

                  by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:58:45 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  ^This.^ The securitization of mortgages (5+ / 0-)

                allowed Wall Street to trade outside of regulation.  

                The Net Capital Rule put a cap on their ratio of debt to capital. (3 to 1) When the big banks got an exemption to this rule, it allowed them to push their leverage up over 35 to 1.  At this level, a move against you of only 3% puts you underwater.

                None of this was the Fed's doing.  Wall Street end around runs of the rules caused the crash.

                "There's been a little complication with my complication"

                by dash888 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:58:28 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Not true (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                hmi, Johnny Q, nextstep, Sparhawk

                Without the cheap money from the Fed and government subsidies from the GSE's, the housing bubble wouldn't have happened.

                None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:03:18 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Utterly false (0+ / 0-)

                  The GSEs weren't even buying sub-prime mortgages until 2006. Bubble was well underway.

                  Fed had had money cheap before without a housing bubble.

                  I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

                  by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:26:23 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Two thing wrong (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Sparhawk, Johnny Q, nextstep

                    First of all your assumption that the housing bubble was only in subprime. It wasn't. It went all the way up to prime mortgages.

                     You are right the the Fed had cheap money before the housing bubble. That's where we find the Dot-Com bubble.

                    None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                    by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:24:28 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Except money is even cheaper now (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  shrike

                  Both long term and short term rates are much lower now than during the bubble.  in any event, the Feds cannot control the long term interest rates.

                  •  Yes, it's even cheaper now (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Sparhawk, Johnny Q, nextstep

                    and that is a problem. Ask any current or soon-to-be retiree.

                      The Fed can't completely control of long-term interest rates, but they sure do influence them. That's what QE was about.

                    None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                    by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:22:06 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  This retiree doesn't think it's a problem (0+ / 0-)

                      No, you're not getting much return if you've got your money in a bank account, but there are plenty of very secure equities that have a record of increasing dividends and plenty of earnings to cover their dividends that are paying a decent dividend rate.

                      Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

                      by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 12:01:53 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Yes- but during the 2006 period, the Feds did (0+ / 0-)

                      not do any QE's, and therefore had no control over the long term interest rates. That's why it is wrong to blame the feds for keeping the interest rates too low- because :
                      1. the interest rates back then were not low.
                      2. The feds had nothing to do with the long term rate back then.

                      •  QE isn't their only tool (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        nextstep

                        In fact, QE is only a recent tool.

                        Check out what happens to rates every time the Fed lowers rates.
                         Supposedly they are only supposed to effect short-term rates, yet long-term rates drop every single time.
                          basically the only question is the shape of the curve.

                         So to say the Fed doesn't effect long-term rates is not right. Not even before QE.

                        None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                        by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 03:19:59 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  Bingo (4+ / 0-)

                And why anyone would want Congress to have more oversight of the Fed is losing touch with which institution is the biggest problem.  The Fed would not have gone anywhere near the lengths with QE if Congress had just done its job creating more stimulus for jobs, building out infrastructure, etc.

                And so despite the lesson of ultimate obstruction with the shutdown/default fiasco, people are arguing to give Congress more leverage over the Fed?

                I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

                by Satya1 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:12:49 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  The mortgage bubble... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              highacidity, Theodore J Pickle

              ...didn't pop because lending standards were low.

              It popped because the borrowers lost their jobs.

              The job losses were a result of our lack of pro-jobs fiscal policy, not the Fed.

              •  All bubbles pop (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sparhawk, hmi, leevank, gjohnsit

                when you start running out of willing suckers to keep inflating them.  Which is inevitable, and why it's called a bubble.

                A lot of people bought mortgages they couldn't afford with the jobs they had because of teaser rates and other dishonest lending practices.  As bad as the jobs picture was in late 2008, I'm pretty sure the foreclosure rate was much higher than the job loss rate.

                Not sure how much the Fed had anything to do with it.  I would think that when the economy was growing up until 2007 they could have inched up rates a bit to dampen the bubble.  Of course since the economy was fundamentally weaker than it appeared and since the housing bubble was the prime driver of growth, it kind of explains why they didn't.

                First they came for the slippery-slope fallacists, and I said nothing. The End.

                by Cream Puff on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:15:17 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  AMEN! (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Sparhawk

                  Bubbles get generated because of greed, and people convincing themselves that the price of something (in this case housing) can grow rapidly forever, or that they're smart enough to get out just before the bubble pops.  Bubbles have been around ever since there have been financial markets, and certainly LONG before there was a Fed.  And they ALL pop!

                  Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

                  by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 12:07:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  It didn't pop because people lost their jobs (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sparhawk

                It popped because there was a "falling out amoungst theives".

                  Credit froze up in August 2007, before the recession hit. It froze up because the lenders stopped trusting each other. They knew they were all liars (with their debt instruments).
                   Once that happened the bubble was going to pop.

                None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 03:29:49 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Simply not true. The interest rate is much lower (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              chuck utzman

              now than during the housing bubble. It wasn't low mortgage interest rate, but loose lending standards, which arguably caused the bubble. But nonetheless, the real reason why the housing bubble caused this huge economic collapse, is because of the securitization of mortgage loans. It is the unchecked derivatives that caused the problem. Otherwse a housing carsh would just be a housing crash.

          •  The Fed and Wall Street are joined at the hip (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            berko, Publius2008, Johnny Q

            One doesn't function without the other.
               The simple fact that the Fed membership on the regional level are all bankers should tell you that.

            None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

            by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:01:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  So? (0+ / 0-)

              Libertarian weirding won't help anything.

              1. Executive office holders should end the Goldman-Fed-Treasury triangle.
              2. Legislature should stop the lobbying from former legislative and executive employees.
              3. There are ways to create walls of separation between industry (financial included, but I'm more worried about medical and agricultural) and regulatory.

              All of this has bug all to do with "accounting" the Fed. The Fed has done something bad? Deal with that. Your executive should, your legislative may, and your judicial must.

              None of this is related to "audit the fed." "Audit the fed" is demagoguery for the purposes of getting fat Libertarian mailing list and donations to Rand for Pres and Goldline for Vice President.

              Everyone's innocent of some crime.

              by The Geogre on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:51:06 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Auditing the Fed (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Johnny Q

                Allows us to know what the Fed is doing with our money.

                There will be no outrage, and thus no reforms, without people knowing what is going on. That information is vital for the process to even get started.

                 For instance, would there now be any real political debate about the NSA without Snowden's whistleblowing? No. Of course not.
                  The same is true for auditing the Fed.

                None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:16:59 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Are you saying the Fed caused the recession? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          librarisingnsf, JayBat, highacidity

          Not Wall St?  (These are related but not he same.)

          •  low interest rates certainly helped the bubble (4+ / 0-)

            form.

            •  Lw Rates are driving Public Pension Funds to Bains (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Sparhawk, johnny wurster

              ..of the world.

              Ironically, public employees at the state and local level are increasingly dependent on the success of private equity funds.  And private equity funds are often successful when they "streamline" operations of the companies they buy; this often involves eliminating "redundancies".

              In fact, over the last five years, the investor that has most increased its exposure to private equity funds has been the public pension fund, going from 15% to 25% of total assets.

              And this is in large part due to Bernanke's 0.125% fed funds rate.

              Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. www.hamiltonproject.org

              by PatriciaVa on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:44:30 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  High interest rates? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gramofsam1, hooper

              The alternative to low interest rates is high interest rates, which isn't really sound policy in an economic downturn. The affect of that would be more or less the same as austerity in government spending. Ask the British how that's working out for them.

              The Bush Family: 0 for 4 in Wisconsin

              by Korkenzieher on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:49:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  the Feds had no control over long term rates (0+ / 0-)

              rates. At least not during the time of the bubble. Now they do- because of the QE action. Back then the Feds were only influencing the short term interest rates.

            •  No (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              hooper

              The availability of credit regardless of ones financial situation mixed with the drum beating of the CNBC types about needing to buy now drove the housing bubble.  If someone is irresponsible enough to take out a 400k loan when they make 40k a year, what makes people think they give a shit about interest rates?  If you ask all of these people about amortization structure and risks caused by market volatility they would look at you like you were an alien.  Also, mortgage rates remain low, yet the housing market has pretty much stagnated in most areas of the county.  If interest rates drive a bubble it should stand to reason that people would still be making foolish housing purchases in record numbers.  

              This isn't to say I am fond of the fed, I just don't think they are the main culprit here.

            •  Greenspan did artificially keep interest rates low (0+ / 0-)

              to spur the housing market. That - combined with all sorts of other factors, like weird new banking "products", the absence of restrictions on borrowing too much, etc - arguable aggravated the bubble.

              But that was Greenspan, the Republican in charge of the Fed, not the Fed structure itself.

              Not to mention the Clinton deregulation of Wall St. (Hey Hillary!)

          •  The Fed should have prevented the recession (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gjohnsit

            It Really Is All Greenspan's Fault - Forbes; April, 2009

            It was, writes Greenspan, Chinese growth that led to “an excess” of global savings. That growth kept long-term interest rates low, which fueled the housing bubble. As for himself, the lowly chairperson of the Fed, he says he was helpless. He only had control over short-term rates.

            Why this recent incarnation as a self-pitying victim of historical forces? Most likely, it’s because of John Taylor, a mild-mannered professor at Stanford and former colleague of Greenspan’s at the Fed.

            In his Getting Off Track, a nifty little book, Taylor exposes, as plain as day, the culprit behind the financial boom-bust: Greenspan.
            <...snip...>
            Greenspan pulls out many stops in his defense. He even quotes the great Milton Friedman’s approving assessment of Fed policy between 1987 and 2005. Well, Friedman died in 2006 and, in 2009, his equally great colleague, Anna Schwartz, has this to say: “There never would have been a subprime mortgage crisis if the Fed had been alert. This is something Alan Greenspan must answer for.” As for Greenspan’s argument that the whole mess is China’s fault, she says tartly: “This attempt to exculpate himself is not convincing. The Fed failed to confront something that was evident. It can’t be blamed on global events.”

            Alan Greenspan: Even Suze Orman Is Trashing Him Now
            Orman pointed to comments Greenspan made in 2004 in which he championed the appropriateness of the adjustable-rate mortgage.
            <...snip...>
            Orman commented that as she watched Greenspan's speech, she was "sitting there, going, 'No! No! Don't do that! Don't do that! Everybody's going to start getting an adjustable-rate mortgage at the exact time they shouldn't.'" And that's exactly what happened.

            It's really hard to read Greenspan's remarks and and come away with an impression other than that Greenspan provided horrendously awful financial advice to millions of homeowners -- advice that contributed to the growth of exotic mortgages like the pay-option ARM and, ultimately, the housing bubble and all the destruction that came with its collapse.

            "But all in all, it's been a fabulous year for Laura and me." - bush, summing up his first year in office, 3 months after 9/11, Washington, D.C., Dec. 20, 2001

            by rmx2630 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 12:38:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, but again, this wasn't "The Fed" as an (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rmx2630

              institution, it was the Fed under Greenspan.   A Republican libertarian monetarist elitist ass.

              The whole financial system is bizarre and ultimately suicidal.  But the Fed is not the crux of the matter, imo, just a piece.  That said, the more light shed on the system the better.

        •  Low interest rates had nothing to do with poor (17+ / 0-)

          risk assessment and the millions of "liar" loans that consumers and banks combined to create.

          The latter caused the mortgage bubble.

          Right now we are seeing the government fine the banks billions for selling non-conforming loans to the GSEs like Fannie Mae.

          .  

          "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Thomas Paine

          by shrike on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:35:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They helped (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            PatriciaVa, johnny wurster, a2nite, hmi

            Are you saying at high interest rates we'd have seen the same phenomena? It doesn't pass the laugh test.

            Also, what did the Fed do about any of the things you mention? Nothing. They sat back and let it happen.

            What if we just let the market set interest rates rather than a giant quasi-governmental organization?

            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

            by Sparhawk on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:43:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  it really is much more sinister (0+ / 0-)

            than that.   For years (decades) loans were packaged and sold without any giant bubbles forming.   Some markets would get hot and then hold, look at gentrifying areas of urban centers,  recreational properties, ex urban areas, etc.,  

            But then commodites were removed from any regulation, banking rules changed, and computer models lead to magic pricing of the theretofore stolid and plodding secondary mortgage market with its historically low risk and low return.   Multiplying financial assets in the hands of a few people as years of tax policy and deregulation erode wages for ordinary people,  inflate profits without reinvestment in industry, etc. so that large amounts of money are looking for highly profitable places to go.   So tranching the loans, cdo's, etc. take off,   demand is high, there need to be more loans,  recession has set in, rethugs need to pump the economy and repay favors to donors,  more deregulation to bring non-traditional borrowers and non-traditional loans into the market place.   Credit was easier to obtain, and in comparison to the 80's or 90's, cheap.     So while real wages are falling, full time employment positions outside of low paying industries is falling,  people are encouraged to buy and invest in real estate.  Since everyone is convinced real estate can't go down (by and large the markets had been ok with few regions having losses in real estate for more than a decade), people pull out their equity, start investing in properties to flip, and a kind of mania takes over.    People with no experience and knowledge all think they can get rich directly in real estate, egged on by bankers getting fees, financial advisors, the newly born financial tv networks, etc, and easy credit.  People with enough sophistication to know better, but apparently not really, buy big into the securitized mortgage instruments, which were anything but low risk low return.    Pump in hot air and prices rising above what any ordinary person could pay for real estate,  serial refinancings as ordinary people attempt to maintain a life style on eroding wages and benefits, and deliberate marketing plans that mislead, or outright defrauded investors in the securitized products, and you have a recipe for disaster.   No regulation, no supervision, no common sense, an over inflated belief that real estate couldn't be worth less tomorrow,  people strung out on credit, and the subtle theft of income encouraged by the Bush tax cuts and other economic policies, as well as massive deficit spending,  and you have a disaster that was sold world wide.   This wasn't just about US domestic lending policies or ignorance of US consumers.  World wide denial that a few trillion in real estate, much of it in non-income producing single family residences,  can't generate 50 trillion or so in payments.

            And so one of the great thefts of wealth occured with all sorts of people acting as willing participants.

      •  A regular audit is not a bad thing (11+ / 0-)

        Audits as a form of chain-pulling, though, would be very bad.

        I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

        by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:21:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  That's a rather contrived excuse for the Fed's (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KittyPawFive, gjohnsit, Johnny Q

        secrecy though. Yeah, they "saved us" in 2008. But didn't their policies in the previous decade help lead us to the disaster in the first place?

        Spite is the ranch dressing Republicans slather on their salad of racism

        by ontheleftcoast on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:21:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Fed not responsible for regulating Wall Street (7+ / 0-)

          I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

          by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:24:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, but they can promote policy that Wall Street (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KittyPawFive, Johnny Q

            takes advantage of. The fed under the entire W administration promoted a bubble economy. How'd that work out for us?

            Spite is the ranch dressing Republicans slather on their salad of racism

            by ontheleftcoast on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:28:09 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The bubble was driven by the CDOs (6+ / 0-)

              Fed had nothing to do with that.

              I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

              by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:41:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  When former Fed Chair Greenspan admits (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                a2nite

                that the Fed should've played a more active roll in preventing the economic disaster I'll take his word for it rather than yours. But heh, what should it matter, he was only the former Fed Chair, it's not like he had any power or anything.

                Spite is the ranch dressing Republicans slather on their salad of racism

                by ontheleftcoast on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:52:40 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You ... are quoting ... GREENSPAN? (0+ / 0-)

                  As though he knows anything about anything?

                  I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

                  by blue aardvark on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:22:24 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No, I'm going by what the Fed itself claims (0+ / 0-)

                    its responsibilities are. I just used Greenspan for effect, he admitted he failed at his job and helped caused the disaster.

                    Spite is the ranch dressing Republicans slather on their salad of racism

                    by ontheleftcoast on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:35:14 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Sounds like a sin of ommission rather than a sin (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Kickemout, leevank

                  of commission. Let's not get carried away with bashing the Feds.  This is a talking point of the libertarians- they refuse to acknowledge that their beloved free market has wrecked teh economy. So they have to create a government bogeyman to lay the blame on.

                  •  There's a difference between bashing on the Fed (0+ / 0-)

                    and wanting it to be more transparent. Rand Paul and his pals think the Fed and the IRS are part of some vast Jewish conspiracy to destroy the world. No, seriously, that craziness is actually regularly discussed by Libertarians. How the Rothchild's used their profits from the Napoleonic Wars to create a market collapse in 1907 and force Woodrow Wilson to create the IRS and Fed. Unfortunately they've got the perfect boogeyman precisely because much of how the Fed operates is a mystery. Get rid of the mystery and they actually lose their boogeyman.

                    Spite is the ranch dressing Republicans slather on their salad of racism

                    by ontheleftcoast on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:46:38 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  Actually they ARE responsible for regulating (5+ / 0-)

            Wall Street. In fact, that was the point of creating the Fed.

              The problem is that Greenspan decided that regulating banks was no longer his concern.

            None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

            by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:06:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks for that (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gjohnsit, hmi, berko

              It amazes me that people don't realize what the Fed is yet are perfectly happy to let it run largely unchecked. Why? Here's a brief description of the Fed's responsibilities and scope of influence

              The U.S. Congress established three key objectives for monetary policy in the Federal Reserve Act: Maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. The first two objectives are sometimes referred to as the Federal Reserve's dual mandate. Its duties have expanded over the years, and today, according to official Federal Reserve documentation, include conducting the nation's monetary policy, supervising and regulating banking institutions, maintaining the stability of the financial system and providing financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions. The Fed also conducts research into the economy and releases numerous publications, such as the Beige Book.
              I'm not in favor of Rand Paul's grandstanding on the nomination of Mrs. Yellen but there does need to be some accounting to Congress for what the Fed does other than approving the nominations.

              Spite is the ranch dressing Republicans slather on their salad of racism

              by ontheleftcoast on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:34:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  But what secrecy? (0+ / 0-)

          I'm not sure what the Fed keeps secret, other then their plans for what they're planning in the future.  But all the assets they buy and the direction of short term interests are pretty much public knowledge.

          I'm just not sure what people expect to find from an audit?

      •  They saved the big banks (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, Publius2008, Magnifico, berko, Johnny Q

        They didn't save the world's economy.

        None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

        by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:00:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The big banks, ARE the worlds economy (0+ / 0-)

          that's why they should be broken apart and we need a new and tougher Glass-Steagall.  The shadow banking system needs to be ripped apart so we can get back to a normal system where capital can be used more efficiently.

          •  If true, then we are in real trouble (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Johnny Q

            When bankers rule the world then we are all serfs.

            None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

            by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:13:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Well, they saved Wall Street. Main Street, not so (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Johnny Q

        much.

        Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

        by The Dead Man on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:28:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, they saved Main Street, too! (0+ / 0-)

          What we were facing would have been worse, perhaps far worse, than the Great Depression.  Anybody who thinks we went through anything like that doesn't have parents who lived through it.

          Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

          by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 12:13:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There is no evidence to back that up (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            The Dead Man

            You may as well make a claim about what would have happened if Napoleon had won at Waterloo.

            None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

            by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 03:39:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah... (0+ / 0-)

        saved it from us.

        Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth. - Lucy Parsons

        by cruz on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:32:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's unclear to me what this "audit" is (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shrike, splashy, icemilkcoffee, The Geogre

      and how it differs from current procedure.  Under current law, the Fed is audited by the GAO and its books are audited by a Big 4 firm.  

      What would this third audit give us? I'm sure there's an answer, I just don't know what it is.

      •  Lower confidence, higher gold buggery (10+ / 0-)

        The idea for "Crazy Uncle Liberty," as Charlie Pierce calls him, is that YOUR mONEY ISN"T WORTH ANYTHING11! Thus, it's all hands on bricks of gold.

        They're sure -- absolutely sure -- that there isn't enough REAL gold to back up the currency.

        Thus, the audit to show that the Fed has been up to monkeyshines of undeterminate and undecipherable sorts that can be woven thread by thread into conspiracies Free Mason, Templar, Gnomes, and Rand Corporation. Whatever the result, the mud and confusion will aid the grand gold bug freak out.

        Everyone's innocent of some crime.

        by The Geogre on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:40:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The Fed is fully audited by Deloitte every year (20+ / 0-)

      What Rand (and Ron) Paul mean by "audit" is for Congress to take over monetary policy and move us toward a gold standard.

      This is idiotic and must be thwarted.

      "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Thomas Paine

      by shrike on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:27:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  On the merits (9+ / 0-)

      Maybe Paul's bill to audit the Fed is a good one, and maybe it isn't. Here's what I do know for sure.

      Paul is a crackpot. He's a physician who's too dumb to support the ACA, and now he's trying to pass himself off as some kind of financial expert?

      Wake me if Elizabeth Warren signs on as a co-sponsor to his bill, otherwise I'm going to assume that Paul and the rest of the libertarians on Capitol Hill want the Fed audited simply as a vehicle to cause mischief in an institution they've hated forever.

      The Bush Family: 0 for 4 in Wisconsin

      by Korkenzieher on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:44:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Audit is not the real "ask" (7+ / 0-)

      Rand Paul, and his father before him, are dedicated to destroying the Fed. They abhor it on the same kind of grounds that the Tea Baggers abhor any social program. And you can count on any bill that Rand Paul wants to bring regarding a "deep audit" of the Fed to be designed to call the concept of a central national bank into question and start a fight about tearing it down.

      Oh, and don't forget that he knows Reid is not going to bring his bill to the floor since they've already been over that. His so-called hold is nothing more than a way to block confirmation of the Fed Chair to cripple the agency. He'd do this whether it was Yellen or not, but he probably especially hates her since she might be effective.

    •  Yes but its not just an audit (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      icemilkcoffee, leevank

      Paul wants congress to dictate fed policy instead of the fed leadership that does it now.

      That quote about GDP by Robert Kennedy

      by erichiro on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:04:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm fine with the audit, but (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark

      I don't like the idea of ending CBO oversight.  If congress is to decide on monetary policy then things will get messier than California's direct democracy efforts. Some things are better of separated from the whims of populism.

    •  I wouldn't mind an audit. I dislike their (0+ / 0-)

      power grab for oversight however.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities" Voltaire.

      by JWK on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:02:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Aww, looks like there is a Senator (15+ / 0-)

    who didn't like the spotlight taken away from him and now has to take a hostage of his own.

    Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote, Up or Down Vote.

    •  a really good one is (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      citizenx

      green leather, yellow leather
      green leather, yellow leather

      green leather, yellow leather
      green leather, yellow leather

      green leather, yellow leather
      green leather, yellow leather

      i'll be leaving it on Senator UppyDownVote's voicemail.

      Addington's perpwalk? TRAILHEAD of accountability for Bush-2 Crimes. @Hugh: There is no Article II power which says the Executive can violate the Constitution.

      by greenbird on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:44:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Rand Paul to take Janet Yellen hostage (13+ / 0-)

    Not to be outdone by Ted Cruz, the epoch battle for the stupid GOP vote, which is pretty much all the GOP vote, Paul decides to take the first women ever nominated to head the Fed, hostage.

    Hey! Why not throw an anchor to that sinking clown car?

  •  Much like the shutdown... (14+ / 0-)

    this would accomplish absolutely nothing.

    As Vice Chair of the Fed, Yellen would automatically take over when Bernanke leaves.

  •  Isn't it about time to stop this shit? (14+ / 0-)

    No single senator should be able to hold up a nomination.

    All nominations should get a timely up or down vote with a simple majority threshold.

    When rules impede progress and consistenly thwart the will of the majority, the rules have to be chnaged.

    Senator Reid - you said that now realize that you've been too soft on the Republican minority in budget deals - the same is true on executive and judicial appointments.

  •  OMG. Put a bunch of (14+ / 0-)

    science-denying, math illiterates in charge of the Fed.

    What could possibly go wrong?

    head/desk

    Irony takes a worse beating from Republicans than Wile E. Coyote does from Acme. --Tara the Antisocial Social Worker

    by Youffraita on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:23:41 AM PDT

  •  Personal holds on senate confirmations (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CorinaR, a2nite, splashy, Dodgerdog1

    should be abolished. They are as anti-democratic as the filibuster.

    And Rand Paul is a constant embarrassment to us in KY. (Every day I weep that Atty. Gen. Jack Conway (D-KY) ran the stupid Aqua Buddha ad. He was tied with Paul and had all the momentum until then.)  That said, I DO believe the Fed ought to be audited--every year. So should the military, the CIA, the NSA.

    "I was not born for myself alone, but for my neighbor as well as myself."--Richard Overton, leader of the Levellers, a17th C. movement for democracy and equality during the English Civil War.

    by SouthernLeveller on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:25:26 AM PDT

  •  Can't Reid just get on the Senate floor and say (7+ / 0-)

    "Fuck holds, we're going to vote whether you like it or not"

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:26:16 AM PDT

  •  I think the business community is going to have (4+ / 0-)

    very little patience for using the Fed as a political football.  I don't think this hold will last very long. I can't imagine that McConnell thinks this is a good idea.

    Global Shakedown - Alternative rock with something to say. Check out their latest release, "A Time to Recognize": Available on iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Spotify and other major online music sites. Visit http://www.globalshakedown.com.

    by khyber900 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:34:37 AM PDT

  •  I don't want Yellen blocked (5+ / 0-)

    but if she's going to be blocked for something, I don't mind this.

    Bring the transparency, why should I mind? I'm not hiding anything.

    I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:37:17 AM PDT

    •  I do mind legislating like this. Even if it's (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, duhban

      legislation 'every body' wants. It's not the way we roll.

      Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

      by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:55:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  it's the way they roll, and we've done nothing (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, Johnny Q

        to stop it. Reid et al could have changed the rules of the Senate when they had a 60 person majority. They didn't. They don't want to. OK. So this is now how Congress does its business.

        Do I like it procedurally? No, I think it's ass. However, as the asininity of Capitol Hill goes, this is much less bothersome than usual.

        I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:00:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Goldbug (10+ / 0-)

    The libertarian ignorance of basic economics is fascinating, but also very frustrating.

    One need not be an economist or mathematician to wonder whether printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy.
    Actually, Senator, I think one should be schooled in basic mathematics and economics before talking about shit you clearly know nothing about.  Money is created out of thin air, or rocks, or paper, or shellfish, or goatskins, or... wait for it... chickens.

    We're all just monkeys burning in hell.

    by smokeymonkey on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:37:24 AM PDT

    •  I know (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Selphinea, IsaacKuo, Eric Nelson, duhban

      Just by saying that, he shows he has no idea what he is talking about.



      Women create the entire labor force.
      ---------------------------------------------
      Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

      by splashy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:49:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think he does know what he's talking about. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, Chitownliberal7, duhban

        But he knows his audience doesn't, so why be honest?

        Patriotism is another word for nationalism. Nationalism is another word for bigotry.

        by Selphinea on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:48:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No Rand Paul is truly is a libertarian idiot... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Eric Nelson, duhban

          Rand Paul is a true believer when it comes to idiot libertarian gold standard worship.  His goal isn't transparency, his goal is to destroy the Fed and destroy its ability to do anything.  This is merely a mechanism for him to gum up the works and make the Fed nonfunctional.

          Now here's the scary thing--he truly believes in destroying the Fed, 100%.  He truly believes in the gold standard, as do the rest of the idiot gold bug libertarians.

          When it comes to his public statements saying that default wouldn't be a big deal...it's possible he was just lying.  But when it comes to his belief in destroying the Fed and belief in the Gold standard...he's not just lying.  He truly believes in that nonsense.

        •  I pick "both of the above!" (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Eric Nelson, duhban, splashy

          He has no idea what he's talking about, and he knows his audience doesn't either, so he doesn't need to bother learning anything.

          Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

          by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 12:18:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Fed should question Paul at a hearing to see if (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      duhban

      understands anything at all about international finance

      "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

      by merrywidow on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:57:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Or, when you think of it "Gold" (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      leevank, duhban

      Sure ... gold is pretty.  It is easily worked into beautiful objects.  Once worked, it never tarnishes and it never rots. Hence: it's a wonderful to make crowns and other regalia from ... and by extension to make status enhancing personal decorations of all times.

      Gold is also useful - especially in scientific experiments and  21st century electronics technology.

      However ... under the old Gold Standards  the specific value of gold at any given time is usually what some authority has declared the gold to be worth.   As fiat money, gold represented a constant value, over  course of centuries.  The unspoken understanding was that the monetary value of gold would always  GREATER than it's value as a commodity.

      But if I understand the Gold Bugs, their NEW Gold Standard would  tie the value of paper money and coinage to the daily market value of the physical bullion.  What happens when new sources of gold come on the market, or when new highly critical industrial uses for gold are discovered -- that I've never heard explained clearly.

      What IS clear ... if you want to dismantle the Union and return to land-based feudalism -- a gold standard would be a good place to start.

      (The transition might be a little stressful for people who have only their labor to sell, though.)

      Ave Eris, y'all !!

      •  There are other issues with using gold as a basis (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        leevank, duhban

        for currency. It means

        *markets cannot be stabilised by government action as easily
        *those with the most property can destabilize the economy at will by hoarding or releasing gold to affect the price. The GS means this has consequences for the rest of the economy as it is all valued in a way affected by gold's price
        *money can effectively be extorted from the government by such action, forcing other costly measures to be taken (supposing the standard cannot be abandoned) or value feedback loops to occur due to the lack of stabilisation, creating deflation or hyperinflation
        *hoarding due to uncertainty locks the economy into recession: gold value goes up due to scarcity, encouraging further hoarding and disincentivizing growth, as this would devalue gold assets
        *it makes debt values uncertain because of the volatility it creates across the whole economy and the currency in which those debts are valued. This discourages lending and thus, potentially, investment and growth (not all debt is invested, as we've seen with recent real-terms pay decreases being squared with economic growth via debt as a substitute for required and disposable income-- in a nutshell, that's the cause of the recent crisis)

        •  you do know (0+ / 0-)

          that gold has been used as money for thousands of years I hope.

          •  Yes ... but for all those thousands of years (0+ / 0-)

            Only the very highest strata of society HAD any money ... or indeed any use for it.

            Of course by the 200 BCE or so, the great Empires had figured out that  significant wealth  could be moved from hand to hand with what we would call "letters of credit." against gold,  and promises to pay in gold,  left on deposit at Temples.

            But 99 and 44/100% of the people still  traded their labor for food  clothing shelter and protection ... using small copper and silver tokens as a  way of avoiding the inconveniences of pure barter.

            The chief drawback of using gold as money directly, or backing fiat money with a fixed percentage of gold on deposit is that a growing economy with both social mobility and a growing middle class (which we didn't really get until the end of the 19th century) requires an   expanding money supply ...

            Hence William Jenning Bryan's Cross of Gold speech .... http://en.wikipedia.org/...

          •  Slavery (0+ / 0-)

            Slavery was used for thousands of years.  That doesn't make it the proper labor policy, does it?

            The gold standard was abandoned by the world's economies for reasons, many of which are stated above in other comments.

            We're all just monkeys burning in hell.

            by smokeymonkey on Wed Oct 30, 2013 at 01:46:47 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Nonpartisan ignorance? (0+ / 0-)

      This is delusional: money is a representation of wealth, it is not itself wealth and printing it doesn't increase wealth.

  •  More ransom demands (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    splashy, CwV, merrywidow, Mark Lippman

    and hostage-taking by those amoral, unethical, political thugs (i.e. Republican'ts)...who just seem to be incapable of acting like adults and governing in a mature, responsible way.

    •  here's an idea... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      merrywidow, Selphinea

      ...how about Harry Reid tell Rand Paul (and any other Republican crackpot with notions of hostage-taking and ransom demands) that he will give them a clean, up-or-down vote on their proposal, if Paul will allow a clean, up-or-down vote on Yellin's nomination...without junking it up with extraneous poison pills.

      That sounds like a fair and reasonable thing that Harry Reid should start incorporating into everything the Senate does, especially when Republicans start wanting to throw their little temper tantrums about unrelated matters: Always promise them a clean, up-or-down vote, with no strings attached, to their proposal, in exchange for the same on proposed Democratic legislation.

      The time for poison pills, hostage-taking, ransom demands and Republican temper tantrums has got to be put behind us.

  •  What a selfish-arrogant, asshole. (4+ / 0-)

    "I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

    by Jeff Y on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:42:46 AM PDT

  •  any real surprise about this? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CwV, merrywidow

    I mean, if it wasn't paul doing it over the Fed audit, it'd be lee doing it over the ACA or graham doing it over more Iran sanctions or vitter doing it over a lack of diapers in the Senate restrooms.  Someone was bound to put a hold on this nomination.

    A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

    by dougymi on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:42:51 AM PDT

    •  Actually, there is a difference (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dougymi, gramofsam1, IsaacKuo, leevank

      Paul and his fellow libertarians want to basically emasculate the Federal Reserve so that they can go back to a gold standard and also have powerful levers to shape (or destroy) government.

      But before they can do that, they need audits that they can badly misrepresent in order to build public support of putting the Federal Reserve into the hand of Congress.

      So no, it's not just general whining: it's a specific and important goal for them.

  •  Make that asshat filibuster on his feet, in public (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    splashy, CwV, merrywidow, 88kathy

    and explain what he wants and why he wants it and just what does he think it will accomplish, how much it will accurately cost and the rest of the details. Then when he is done, get that man an IV, a dentist, an oral surgeon, an internal medicine specialist, cardiologist, and an orthopedic surgeon.

    What do you mean why all that?

    You know damned well that once he gets started putting his foot in his mouth he won't stop at one and he won't finish until both feet are sticking out of his ass.

    Give blood. Play hockey.

    by flycaster on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:44:08 AM PDT

    •  Dr. Seuss has a very large block of writing that (0+ / 0-)

      probably be read into the Congressional Record. I don't think Rand Paul can talk for more that 20 minutes w/o reading Seuss.

      In fact I wouldn't mind a new rule for the Senate, the 21 hour speech to let us know if you are dependable.

      _____

      Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

      by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:10:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What part of "fiat money" doesn't Rand Paul get? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, IsaacKuo

    What is wrong with these people?



    Women create the entire labor force.
    ---------------------------------------------
    Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

    by splashy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:44:29 AM PDT

  •  Paul Is Dead Right About This ... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gjohnsit, BigAlinWashSt, hmi, Johnny Q
    The Fed’s favored practice of “quantitative easing” has been questionable at best. One need not be an economist or mathematician to wonder whether printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy. Still, as The Washington Post’s Neil Irwin notes, “Yellen has been not merely an engineer of the Fed’s policies of ‘quantitative easing’ and ‘forward guidance,’ but a consistent voice within the central bank to go further.”
    QE is a disaster for the real economy and the real people who live in it.
        •  I know where your quote's from (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gramofsam1

          I want to know how quantitative easing ruined the economy.

          •  Let's Put It This Way ... (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Selphinea, hmi, berko, Johnny Q, gjohnsit

            Our economy is now a bubble economy where we inflate asset prices until they pop. That's what happened in 2007-08 and that is what QE is doing now to an even larger extent. Which suggests to me that the next bubble is going to burst even more horrifically.

            In any event, all QE does is give more free money to the Wall Street gamblers who now run the economy, the nation, and the world. Think about this: We are doing this now with our eyes wide open. Why? Because those in charge are doctrinnaire neoliberals who are gorging themselves at our expense.

            Doubt it? Check the statistics on income disparity. Notice that the Top 1% have taken almost every dollar of the so-called recovery. Or consider that median income is lower than it was in 1989. And we are doubling down on the very same policies that got us here.

            •  Are you saying bubbles didn't exist before 1913? (0+ / 0-)

              Because history is FULL of them, long before the Fed was ever created.  Read "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds," which was first published in 1841, and describes numerous bubbles that had existed long before that.  Bubbles are created by greed, and belief in the "greater fool theory," not the Fed.  The MOST that can be said is that the Fed should be more active in stopping them, but since 2008, the Fed has been walking a tightrope between creating a financial bubble and sending the country into another steep economic downturn.

              Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

              by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 12:28:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, Bubbles Existed Before the Fed (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gjohnsit

                But now the Fed manufactures them.

                Creating new and bigger asset bubbles is hardly the solution to a crash emanating from asset bubbles. It is insanity.

                •  So what SHOULD the Fed have done? (0+ / 0-)

                  It's easy to criticize, as long as you don't have to propose alternatives.  Congress clearly wasn't going to pass major fiscal stimulus, even though it was needed.  So should the Fed have simply done nothing, and let the economy go into a Depression?

                  Also, there is scant evidence of a bubble at this time. Inflation is low, stock prices aren't irrational, and there is very little evidence of a bubble anywhere else in the economy.

                  Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

                  by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 01:07:56 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  A Couple of Rejoinders (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Johnny Q, gjohnsit
                    Congress clearly wasn't going to pass major fiscal stimulus, even though it was needed.
                    In fact, Congress did pass a major stimulus bill in 2008 but it was far too small, as warned at the time. Obama defied his economic advisors and asked for too little when he could have had anything he wanted. Now we are negotiating the Sequester cuts to defense which presents an opportunity for real stimulus but I doubt the Dems will seriously push for it. Obama and the Democrats are very proud of their deficit reduction.
                    there is scant evidence of a bubble at this time.
                    That's what they said in 2007.
    •  What? It keeps things going, a stimulus (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gramofsam1, IsaacKuo

      what is your problem wtih it?

      "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

      by merrywidow on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:59:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's Not The Right Kind Of Stimulus (6+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        geez53, a2nite, Selphinea, hmi, Johnny Q, gjohnsit

        It's the kind of stimulus that says giving the filthy rich even more free money will trickle down to us somehow someway. It doesn't work and it won't work. In the meantime, the asset bubbles will keep enlarging until .... guess what?

        •  Agree here .......free money to the 1% will never (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a2nite, Selphinea, Johnny Q

          "trickle down". that's why they're the 1%

          Put that money or any "gubment" money at the bottom of the pyramid scheme for real things. From highways to quality K-12 critical thinking education. You know, stuff for the 100%.

          21st Century America: The distracted, superficial perception of a virtual reality. Gettov Milawn

          by geez53 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:24:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  The right kind of stimulus will not pass the house (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          merrywidow, Theodore J Pickle

          Of course, real government spending and real infrastructure work that hires people, is the best kind of stimulus.  But since NOTHING of that sort will make it past the House, fiscal stimulus is the second (or last) best option.

          It's better than doing nothing, which is what Rand Paul wants.

          •  Four Points (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gjohnsit

            1. By all accounts, Obama defied his economic advisors by asking for a too-small stimulus in 2008.

            2. Since we are now negotiating on the Sequester cuts to defense, this is the place to demand genuine, people-helping stimulus in return.

            3. Yes, the House might refuse to exchange the defense Sequester cuts for genuine stimulus. But we won't know that unless that is what the Democrats demand. Which I doubt they will.

            4. Sometimes there is nothing positive to de done and the best one can do is not make things worse. QE is making things dramatically worse and the reckoning will be hellish. Guess who will pay the costs for the next crash?

            •  The sequester gambit already failed (0+ / 0-)

              It turns out the right wing just wants to sabotage the contry. They don't even care if they defense buddies are getting starved.  You cannot force these people to do anything. Their hatred of Obama is too great. They WANT to wreck this country.

          •  In other words (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gjohnsit

            The only way forward is over the cliff.  Actually fixing the problem is not an option and never was.  So bringing it up is unpatriotic and unpragmatic.

            You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

            by Johnny Q on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 01:38:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  P.S. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Johnny Q, gjohnsit

        I saw a story yesterday that 49% of residential estate sales in the U.S. are now all cash. That's rich people playing with free money. That's QE.

    •  The disaster is kidnap government. A bill passed (0+ / 0-)

      the House and is in the Senate. That is the way we roll. Kidnappers are wrong even if the need the ransom.

      Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

      by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:07:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  How is it a disaster that I can refinance my (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      leevank

      house, from a 30 year loan, to a 15 year loan, thanks to the 3.X% interest rate?

      •  Ask Me That After The Next Crash (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Johnny Q

        And consider this: When the next crash happens, the Fed will be out of bullets. Then what?

        Besides, in the the real economy the question is not whether you can refinance your home to a lower rate. That's asset inflation; that's the financial economy. In the real economy, the question is whether you can find good jobs with increasing wages. On that score, our economy is a miserable failure.

        •  'when the next crash happens' (0+ / 0-)

          When is that going to happen? You are the one who said that QE has been a disaster. When asked what disaster you are talking about- you point to some future, not-yet-happening 'next crash'. That means you got nothing.

          The unemployment problem is still a problem. Nobody is denying it. But it is getting better slowly. Unemployyment rate is going down. Initial jobless claims have been low the whole quarter. We have positive economic growth and positive consumer spending growth. It is a slow grind. But disaster it isn't.

          •  The Real Economy Is Collapsing (0+ / 0-)

            QE has been a disaster on its face. Our economy is now a crack addict, hooked on free and easy money from the Fed. Assets are appreciating far beyond any real world valuations. Income inequality is rising not falling. Median income is stagnant. All of the gains in the "recovery" have gone to the Rich. The jobs now being created are low-level service and part-time jobs. We are going backward not forward and we are going backward even faster than we did the last time.

            And now the Fed CAN'T stop QE because that ship has sailed. You tell me how it's going to end.

    •  Paul is mostly wrong... (0+ / 0-)

      The first sentence is potentially right, but the rest of the paragraph is the ravings of an idiot who does not actually understand what money is.

      First, money is entered into computer via key stroke. So, money is never printed out of thin air. But, we can call that a metaphor.

      Second, that is the ONLY way money is created. Let me repeat that.  The only way to create money is for the US government ie Congress or its designated by law delegate(s) to create money from thin air via keystroke in a computer. Paul should read the Constitution some day.

      Back to the first sentence, doe quantitative easing do much, not really.  Because all it does is convert and interest bearing asset for another non-interest bearing asset (ie.  money) in order to hopefully lower long term interest rates in the hopes that the now owners of a non-interest bearing assets seeking returns invest in something that will create jobs.  The more likely effect is to help blow up an asset bubble as the non-interest bearing currency is used to buy assets with better returns.

      Even worse most of the purchases are treasury bonds which are virtually identical to currency with the sole exception that they pay interest.  So, replacing interest bearing government obligations (bonds) with non-interest bearing government obligations (currency) will quite likely do the opposite of "printing money out of thin air" since currency does not pay interest over time currency creates less money than bonds.

      But, monetary policy can only apply a few levers to affect the economy, the main one being interest rates both short term and long term.  Long term rates are controlled by activities like quantitative easing and short term rates via the federal funds rate.  The problem is that these levers are much weaker than what fiscal plicy could accomplish by running larger deficits and spending that money on productive things like roads, bridges, public transportation, green energy, research, and more that increase productivity.  Thus creating an outlet for the additional financial assets that the government is adding to the private sector and preventing inflation until full employment is reached.  At which time, fiscal policy needs to adjust to prevent additional financial assets from entering the private sector in excess of the savings rate and trade deficit and thus mitigating inflation.

  •  Fed is already audited regularly (5+ / 0-)

    This is to subject monetary to the same hostage-taking as the budget.

    Pure Goldbuggery.

    "Who is John Galt?" A two dimensional character in a third rate novel.

    by Inventor on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:45:54 AM PDT

  •  I'd like to know... (0+ / 0-)

    what Alan Grayson thinks of this tactic, as he's been one of the loudest voices on the Democratic side in bringing transparency to the Fed.  Notably, he is NOT one of the 13 Democrats who's co-sponsored Broun's bill to audit the Fed, so it makes me think there's some poison pill hidden in that bill somewhere.

  •  Once again they can't pass a bill so they (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    splashy, a2nite

    STOP, BLOCK, QUIT to get their way.

    Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

    by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:47:01 AM PDT

  •  I don't see anything wrong with auditing the Fed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    merrywidow, IsaacKuo

    But I'm against putting things under congressional control until such time as congress becomes fit enough to manage a lemonade stand.  Until congress becomes more than just a hive of Republican assholes and democrats trying to prevent damage their influence needs to be reduced, not expanded.

  •  As if we needed another (0+ / 0-)

    example of the Senate as an outdated House of Lords, long past it's sell-by date. Why should Californians suffer because Kentuckians elect halfwits?

  •  Why would anyone be against a complete audit (4+ / 0-)

    of the Federal Reserve?

    "It is easier to pass through the eye of a needle then it is to be an honest politician."

    by BigAlinWashSt on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:48:17 AM PDT

    •  Nothing wrong with auditing the fed (3+ / 0-)

      In fact, here's an audit you can read right now:

      http://www.federalreserve.gov/...

      •  Can't open it. But I know about the supposed (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Johnny Q

        audits the Federal Reserve propaganda system tells the people about.  I'm talking about a comprehensive independent audit.  I'm not sure why people would be against that.   But fortunately most of the country would not be against that type of audit. If we could only get our political "representatives" to do their jobs.

        "It is easier to pass through the eye of a needle then it is to be an honest politician."

        by BigAlinWashSt on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:26:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  A bill has passed the House but Rand wants to (0+ / 0-)

      do it the easy, unAmerican way, STOP, BLOCK, QUIT.  Or maybe there's not enough votes in the Senate.

      _______

      Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

      by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:54:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  on a non-partisan basis completely separate from (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BigAlinWashSt

      and free of political interests by credentialed experts who are qualified with a background that demonstrates a thorough understanding of the subject matter. Not by yokels coming in with flashlights on the front of their miner's helmets.

      There is no existence without doubt.

      by Mark Lippman on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:30:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well of course. Rand Paul can stuff it, he's (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Johnny Q

        a liar and a politician, and I don't trust his motivations one bit.  But I see people defending the Fed and indicating an audit isn't needed or the audits the Fed does conduct are sufficient.  So I was just questioning that.  What's the big deal?  We should want audits of all federal government organizations to insure they're doing what they should be doing and not doing what they shouldn't be doing.  It should be all the more imperative since the Fed is a private organization.  
        In fact, it says something that we are even having this conversation.  Government audits should be a no brainer.

        "It is easier to pass through the eye of a needle then it is to be an honest politician."

        by BigAlinWashSt on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:36:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Just because someone says he wants an audit (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Theodore J Pickle

          doesn't mean he wants an audit. And your idea of an audit isn't his idea of an audit.  

          For transparency you hold confirmation hearings in an open conference before the American people and you ask Yellen all the questions you want about Fed audits and any other topic.  We all want to hear what she thinks.  She has been there for a long time and we should have a chance to hear what she says about auditing the Fed.  

          Blocking the hearing to consider her nomination shows a lack of sincerity about the audit.  

           

          There is no existence without doubt.

          by Mark Lippman on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:09:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Survival of the fittest (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Theodore J Pickle

    The filibuster is in imminent danger of extinction because it impairs the fitness of the Senate to do its work.  But if a privilege that lets a 40 Senator minority block needed action is maladaptive, obviously extending that privilege to 1 Senator minorities is maladaptive in spades.

    So, what will it be, America, kill the hold, or let it kill you?  What do you need more, a privilege extended to any random idiot some red state sends to the Senate in a fit of blind rage, or a Fed chair to see us through the next crisis created by the same Malefactors of Great Wealth who pour millions into whipping red states into fits of blind rage?

    It's not me forcing you to make that choice.  It's Rand Paul.

    The states must be abolished.

    by gtomkins on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:50:09 AM PDT

    •  If Rand Paul has so much to say let him filibuster (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, icemilkcoffee

      the silent but deadly filibuster is a stinky way to cut the cheese.

      Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

      by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:05:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He doesn't have to filibuster (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        88kathy

        Filibusters only work if you get 40 other Senators to support your position.  Holds only require Rand Paul his own self.  You can't be totally crazy and get 40 Republican Senators behind you.  But you only have to be Lone Gunman crazy to put a hold.

        Both the hold and the filibuster are privileges that are only compatible with a Senate that functions at all, if the minority and individual Senators can be trusted to act with self-restraint and a sense of proportion.  When we have a whole party that doesn't want the Senate to function much, and that party is studded with crazies who don't want it to function at all, then continuing to extend these privileges guarantees that the Senate will not be able to function.

        If this nation needs a Senate that functions, it needs to rid itself of the hold and the filibuster.

        The states must be abolished.

        by gtomkins on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:17:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  May I. (0+ / 0-)
          If this nation needs a Senate that functions, it needs to rid itself of the hold and the filibuster.
          Sometimes a rec just isn't enough.

          ______

          Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

          by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:33:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  that caricature is terrifying (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    88kathy

    Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
    Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights for support in dealing with grief.

    by TrueBlueMajority on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:52:40 AM PDT

  •  I'm calling it more rightwing obstructionism (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, 88kathy

    The people can decide whether or not Rand Paul is a Teabagger or if he just uses the same tactics which Tabaggers use.

    I don't negotiate with terrorists. I don't vote for them, either.

    by thenekkidtruth on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:53:02 AM PDT

  •  Damn it. I don't like Rand Paul, but ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KittyPawFive

    I feel sorry for Randroids, but don't take 'em seriously. When the new Randroid king was anointed I saw him as an object of mockery, but damn it if this stopped clock isn't right on this case. In fact, he's been right on quite a few cases (though sickeningly wrong on most others that I've read about).

    I hope he wins this fight, but I doubt it.

  •  public audits on all large entities including (0+ / 0-)

    private corporations - why not, Mr. Libertarian, since you're willing to apply force to an already commingled MIC

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:54:27 AM PDT

  •  holding Yellen (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades, 88kathy

    is the wrong way to go about this. The Fed system in its entirety needs looking at,  it needs auditing, etc.  But, and this is a huge but to me, after the performance of Congress over the debt limit,  being held hostage by the teahadists and many people not having the guts to stand up to them in the Republican Party, and the constant issue of whether Democrats can hold the line in negotiations,   is it safe to entrust oversight of the Fed to Congress, does our money supply become a political football as well, a new debt limit hostage?

    Then there's just the emotional reaction, if Rand Paul is for it, the plan must be deeply flawed in some way.

  •  We need to stop opposing people are start (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BigAlinWashSt, Johnny Q

    opposing policies.

      I support Rand Paul in this effort. The Fed needs to be more transparent.

     Sure, Rand Paul is a disgusting person who supports a lot of things I oppose with my whole being, but this isn't one of those things.

    None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

    by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:58:38 AM PDT

    •  he is not being honest, an audit is not what he (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, gramofsam1

      wants, read the history of the family

      "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

      by merrywidow on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:02:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hostage government by ransom is not the way we (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite

      ROLL.

      If he wants to block, he can talk for 21 hours on why? DR Seuss wrote a lot of books so he will have material to read into the Congressional Record to show for all time his thought process on the matter.

      ________

      Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

      by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:03:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We aren't talking about government default (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BigAlinWashSt, hmi, Johnny Q

        We are talking about blocking a nomination for an agency until the role of government oversight of said agency is decided.

          This is something both parties do all the time.

        None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

        by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:10:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We are talking about GOP SOP - STOP, BLOCK,QUIT (0+ / 0-)

          Actually blocking nominations is something they do to President Obama all the time. This is just a test. They are like little kids testing the rules. Well if we can't stop the government and default paying its bills, can we eliminate all the people running the government by appointment.

          I don't think this is going to end well for Rand.

          _________

          Only gun owners can control their guns and they say oopsie way too much. I lost it, I forgot it, it just went off. Support Gun Kill Speed Limits and Gun Ownership Speed Limits.

          by 88kathy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:15:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, in this case I think it is (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gramofsam1, IsaacKuo

      His beef here is with quantitative easing.

      If the Fed had not done that, we'd be deep, deep in a 1929 style depression, and not just an awful recession.

      Sorry, but I don't want to empower teabaggers to prevent using fiscal policy instruments. They'd have us all back on gold, if they could.

      Rick Perry - the greatest scientist since Galileo!

      by Bobs Telecaster on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:04:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  QE also caused the income inequality (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BigAlinWashSt, hmi, Johnny Q

        QE saved the banks. It didn't save the economy.

        None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

        by gjohnsit on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:08:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It is a thing many hate to hear (0+ / 0-)

          But if we had not saved the banks, we'd have been in deep trouble. A run on banks was one of the main reasons for the Great Depression.

          All of the stuff done in the time since was to sure the fluidity of credit (as important to small business as to big), and to ensure deposit survival (deposit insurance is a great thing, but would have collapsed with enough banks going down.)

          Rick Perry - the greatest scientist since Galileo!

          by Bobs Telecaster on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:05:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Trillions to the rich will do that. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gjohnsit, Johnny Q

          "It is easier to pass through the eye of a needle then it is to be an honest politician."

          by BigAlinWashSt on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:07:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Good grief (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IsaacKuo, leevank, Eric Nelson

    Because, you know, quantitative easing has sent inflation so high. :roll:

    Rick Perry - the greatest scientist since Galileo!

    by Bobs Telecaster on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:02:14 AM PDT

  •  This is smart politics by Paul (0+ / 0-)

    There is support out there for making the Fed more transparent.  I do not support the Fed audit because I don't want Congress to have the ability to politicize the Fed.  However, I know a lot of Democrats who would support this.  I think this will get shut down by the Republicans.  The business community will have little tolerance for anything that interferes with the Feds activities especially post-shutdown,

    Global Shakedown - Alternative rock with something to say. Check out their latest release, "A Time to Recognize": Available on iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Spotify and other major online music sites. Visit http://www.globalshakedown.com.

    by khyber900 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:02:41 AM PDT

  •  Nobody loves the Fed... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Publius2008, KittyPawFive, RF, Johnny Q

    ...and nobody loves the banks.

    Rand Paul is attempting to put Democrats in the position of defending the banksters.

    If we fall for it, we are idiots and deserve to lose.

    We should support an audit of the Fed. It is a good idea, a popular idea, and it is a progressive idea. The Fed should answer to elected officials and the public.

    Give Rand his vote (I hope he wins) and move on. There is nothing here but pain for us if we fight him.

  •  Rand Paul is a neo-confederate who can't come (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Theodore J Pickle, leevank

    up with enough schemes to turn the USA into a modern-day version of the CSA.

    This guy helped to create the conditions for debt default, he voted against ending the crisis, he paved the way for an irreparable economic catastrophe and trivialized it by denying it would even happen, and he says he wants to audit the Fed.

    No.  

    There is no existence without doubt.

    by Mark Lippman on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:10:06 AM PDT

  •  congressional oversight (0+ / 0-)

    is a drawback, any more. Most of the oversight committees wouldn't know oversight if it jumped out in front of them He's just trying to get his own way, again.

    (Is it time for the pitchforks and torches yet?)

    by PJEvans on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:10:31 AM PDT

    •  Truer words were never spoken! (0+ / 0-)

      When a member of the House Science Committee announces that evolution, the Big Bang, and the entire field of embryology are straight from "the pit of hell," and that the Earth is only about 9,000 years old, you've got to wonder how much the members of whatever committee that would be overseeing the Fed would know about economics.

      Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

      by leevank on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 12:47:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  On the subject of Goldbuggery ... (0+ / 0-)

    Now,  I appreciate liberal talk show hosts  Ed Shults, Randi Rhodes and Thom Hartmann ...

    And I understand that the people selling gold coins, bars and chains would want to advertise to as many people in as many markets as possible.  So why not Liberal Talk Radio?

    But do each of these hosts have to READ the "And that's why I own gold"copy, (written during the depths of the Great Recession) which predicts the collapse of the American economy, and the urgent need for gold (bought at retail consumer prices) as a hedge against disaster.  

  •  more government regulations????? (0+ / 0-)

    from a Libertarian?

    Explain yourself, Rand.


    I'm not an atheist. How can you not believe in something that doesn't exist? That's way too convoluted for me. - A. Whitney Brown

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:12:37 AM PDT

  •  Summary of the Bill (0+ / 0-)

    Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2013 - Directs the Comptroller General (GAO) to: (1) complete, within 12 months of enactment of this Act, the required audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) and of the Federal Reserve Banks; and (2) submit to Congress, within 90 days of audit completion, a detailed report of audit findings and conclusions.

    Repeals certain limitations placed upon such audit.

    Instructs the Comptroller General (GAO) to audit and report on the review of loan files of homeowners in foreclosure in 2009 or 2010, required as part of the enforcement actions taken by the Board against supervised financial institutions. Prescribes audit contents, including: (1) the guidance given by the Board to independent consultants retained by the supervised financial institutions regarding procedures to be followed in conducting the file reviews, (2) the factors considered by independent consultants when evaluating loan files and the results obtained pursuant to those reviews, and (3) the determinations made by such consultants regarding the nature and extent of financial injury sustained by each homeowner as well as the level and type of remediation offered.

  •  I finally understand - they think they're CATS. (0+ / 0-)
    This will be the fight of our lives—but this is our moment!
    For them to have a "fight of our lives" every few months, they MUST think they have nine lives.

    The word "parent" is supposed to be a VERB, people...

    by wesmorgan1 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:13:21 AM PDT

  •  Hate to tell ya, but a lot of us are for auditing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BigAlinWashSt, Johnny Q

    the fed and figuring how just how much free money was given to the TBTF banks.  Why should that be secret?

    He who would trade liberty for security deserves great customer service.

    by Publius2008 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:13:53 AM PDT

  •  Actions on the Bill (0+ / 0-)

    2/4/2013:
        Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
    2/7/2013:
        Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 12.

  •  Nothing more than GOP standard obstruction... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    The Heritage FOundation issued a memo "requesting" Republicans to not engage into any legislating effort, which was a broad call to JAM Washington.

    Paul simply using another excuse to do that...

  •  I find it the height of absurdity (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    leevank

    that the same folks that cost us over $24 billion, (Paul, Cruz et al) in the recent shutdown/default fiasco think they should be trusted with more oversight and leverage over the Fed.
    For the most part, the Fed has been engaging in whatever it can in order to try to help the economy sustain a recovery - to make up for the utter lack of responsibility Congress has shown with respect to recovery, income inequality and employment.

    Count me as a fan of Bernanke.

    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

    by Satya1 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:18:00 AM PDT

  •  The Senate General Calendar (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson

    Available here:
    http://www.gpo.gov/...

    The bill is item 12. on the calendar.

    Dunno what it means in terms of Senate procedures.

  •  enough of this nonsense (0+ / 0-)

    nuclear option, please

    Join the War on Thinking. Watch Fox News- John Lucas

    by Jlukes on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:20:59 AM PDT

  •  Best I can tell (0+ / 0-)

    Rand Paul's bill is much less sweeping than Ron Paul's bill of 2012; and looks much more innocuous.

    I haven't looked at the current House Bill.  Perhaps the House bill is dangerous, and will extend itself into the Senate bill upon reconciliation?

    •  Ah! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Nelson

      They want to strike section (f) here ( (f) of section 714 of title 31):

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/...

      Anyone understand the implications of that?

      •  (a) of section 714 of title 31 says (0+ / 0-)

        Audits of the Board and Federal reserve banks may not include—
        (1) transactions for or with a foreign central bank, government of a foreign country, or nonprivate international financing organization;
        (2) deliberations, decisions, or actions on monetary policy matters, including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations;
        (3) transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee; or
        (4) a part of a discussion or communication among or between members of the Board and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System related to clauses (1)–(3) of this subsection.

        ----
        Seems to me as long as section (a) is intact, there should not be a problem.  Anyone?

    •  I was wrong (0+ / 0-)

      Rand Paul's bill is identical to Ron Paul's bill.  I was relying on press reports of what the bill did per Ron Paul versus the text of the legislation for Rand Paul.

  •  This should endear everyone, especially the (0+ / 0-)

    business community, to Rand.  Keep up the good work.

  •  Sorry, but Yellen doesn't inspire anything (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KittyPawFive, BigAlinWashSt, hmi, Johnny Q

    beyond a knee-jerk FU to Paul.  She will still be a tool of Wall Street, just won't be an asshole about it like Summers.

    Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

    by The Dead Man on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:32:01 AM PDT

  •  No votes for teabagger proposed bills (0+ / 0-)

    No matter how worthy the content of the bill is.

    Simply teabaggers shouldn't be given the time of day.  Period.  If the bill has some merit, let it be introduced by a non-teabagger.

    Don't call these racist thugs the tea party, they are *teabaggers*! Please don't insult the original Tea Party as they were patriots. Call them TeaBaggers!

    by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:36:34 AM PDT

  •  Sam Seder interviews Jim Bruce; Fed Documentary (0+ / 0-)

    Evidence that contradicts the ruling belief system is held to extraordinary standards, while evidence that entrenches it is uncritically accepted. -Carl Sagan

    by RF on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:44:00 AM PDT

  •  One senator can hold Senate business for ransom (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    End the filibuster, Harry.

    Black criminals are treated like animals. Black victims are treated like criminals. Black heroes are treated like punchlines. -@aemccarthy

    by docterry on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:50:18 AM PDT

  •  Another opportunity (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson

    to let congress micro-manage things they don't understand.  A GOP specialty.

    feh.

    I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

    by trumpeter on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 10:52:19 AM PDT

  •  One need not be (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IsaacKuo

    One need not be an economist or mathematician to know that if you want per capita economic growth in a country whose population is also increasing you in fact do have to "print money out of thin air"

  •  Just another Republican "patriot" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happy camper, IsaacKuo

    Coming to kill the dollar.

    That's right.  Put congress in charge of the dollar.  It'll be dead by the end of the decade.

    Fuck you phony "patriots".  And this asshole  uses language like "aid and abet".

    Sick to death of you teabagging traitors.

    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

    by yet another liberal on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:01:59 AM PDT

  •  Great idea! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IsaacKuo, Eric Nelson, leevank

    Give control over monetary policy to a bunch of clueless teabagger politicians, so they can use that as a weapon too.

    If Rand Paul supports it, it's the worst possible course of action.

    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

    by happy camper on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:07:42 AM PDT

  •  Rand Paul (0+ / 0-)

    Is a non board certified optometrist.  But yeah, he should have a huge role in economic planning.  Maybe I should seek my baker's advice about foreign policy.  

  •  Auditing the Fed (0+ / 0-)

    If Randy were willing to strip his proposal of all the wack-o anti-Fed rhetoric, it might be worth taking a look at.

    "The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little. " --Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by jg6544 on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 11:59:13 AM PDT

  •  Audit? more like more Ron 'end the Fed' Paul.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    leevank, IsaacKuo

    ..regurgitated talking points.
    Still trying to 'get just the right wording' to sell this dumb idea and get back to the gold standard and eliminate the Fed it sure sounds like to me.

    ..to prevent Yellen, or any other future nominee, from using the enormous power of the Fed to aid and abet the allies of big government...blah, blah, blah..bankrupting our nation (read: fake debt meme)...blah, blah, blah.. [read:strip the Fed's control and ability to stimulate the economy via]  “quantitative easing”..
    The Fed has two main functions:
    1) keep inflation in check and
    2) keep joblessness to a minimum (strive for lowest unemployment possible.  

    A delicate fiscal balancing act.

    Rand Paul wants to cripple the Fed. Stripping its ability to continue quantitative easing without congressional approval and hand it over to congress.

    This is taking the job protection/promoting part of the Fed chair duties away and a very bad move imo

    ..printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy.
    - Rand Paul
    .."out of thin air", as opposed to 'gold',  the Ron/Rand Paul same old 'gold standard crap Ron Paul has always promoted and more of the effort to eliminate the Fed altogether

    So, Good deal, Janet Yellen taking the intitiative and meeting with Dems (and some republicans on the Hill.

    petition signed (again - hope that's okay too)

    Thx MB

  •  sadly I'm sure people will cheer this on (0+ / 0-)

    just like his stupid 'filabuster'.

    Der Weg ist das Ziel

    by duhban on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 03:13:27 PM PDT

  •  How to shut down the goverment without even (0+ / 0-)

    trying.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site