Sen. Warren Opposes ‘Audit the Fed’ Bill

[n2doc]

By KATE DAVIDSON
Updated Feb. 10, 2015 11:55 a.m. ET

A critical question for Sen. Rand Paul’s effort to expand oversight of the Federal Reserve’s interest-rate decisions is whether he could win support from the central bank’s leftist critics in Congress.

But one of the Senate’s most prominent liberal Democrats says she’s not on board.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), a member of the Banking Committee and an outspoken critic of the Fed’s oversight of big banks, said she does not support Mr. Paul’s proposed legislation, which she said could have “dangerous” implications for monetary policy.

“I strongly support and continue to press for greater congressional oversight of the Fed’s regulatory and supervisory responsibilities, and I believe the Fed’s balance sheet should be regularly audited – which the law already requires,” Ms. Warren said in an emailed statement. “But I oppose the current version of this bill because it promotes congressional meddling in the Fed’s monetary policy decisions, which risks politicizing those decisions and may have dangerous implications for financial stability and the health of the global economy.”

more
http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-REB-30710

[Cayenne]

1. Sellout!

[djean111]

3. Who is a sellout? You think a Rand Paul or a Ted Cruz should be meddling in the Fed?

They don't want to abolish it, IMO, they want to use it for their own purposes.

[Cayenne]

5. So what? Fed still needs an audit

One corporation literally steers the economy and we should blindly trust them?

[MADem]

13. You want to re-read the OP, I think, particularly the part that says

“I strongly support and continue to press for greater congressional oversight of the Fed’s regulatory and supervisory responsibilities, and I believe the Fed’s balance sheet should be regularly audited – which the law already requires,” ...

[djean111]

2. She is right. The GOP just wants to politicize it.

[Vincardog]

4. Here is a hint "those decisions are already made for BASE greedy reasons and have dangerous

implications for financial stability and the health of the global economy.”

[Demeter]

6. Elizabeth Warren is wrong here. She's not completely transitioned

into her new reality. If she never accepts her leadership position of the People, By the People, For the People, we will be the poorer for it.

She has one foot in her old Establishment, policy-wonk, go along to get along life,

and another on the Populist banana peel. So, it's a test of character: her character.

Be kind as you entreat her to go through the Looking Glass. She may not have as much imagination as Alice did.

[RiverLover]

7. So you agree with Rand Paul here? really?

You want the (majority) kooks in congress to control monetary policy & interest rates?

Are you on the wrong side, and just fell into the looking glass yourself?

[Cayenne]

8. So it is better to let a corporation decide policy and rates for us?

Why do you want to protect the bankesters?

[RiverLover]

9. You have it backwards, congress IS controlled by banksters

Hello?

FYI~

One of President Obama’s top economic advisers said Tuesday he opposed “dangerous” legislation that would give lawmakers closer scrutiny over Federal Reserve deliberations.

Jason Furman, chairman of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, called pending legislation subjecting monetary policy deliberations to outside review “somewhere between superfluous and highly counterproductive.”

He added that he would encourage President Obama to oppose the bill if it reached his desk. That opposition could be noteworthy, as previous efforts have stalled in a Democrat-led Senate, which is now in GOP control.

Furman argued that the bill, presented by its proponents as a needed check on the central bank, would effectively allow lawmakers critical of the Fed to second-guess its moves.

“What that bill is about is about Congress supplanting its judgment as to what monetary policy should be,” he said in an interview with Bloomberg TV. “Congress shouldn’t be telling the Fed what to do with monetary policy.”

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/232337-wh-official-audit-the-fed-bill-is-dangerous

[Cayenne]

10. “Congress shouldn’t be telling the Fed what to do with monetary policy.”

THAT IS OUTRAGEOUS! of course they should, it is our money! A private corporation with secret owners should not be the ones deciding national policy.

There shouldn't even be a FED. Being that there is Congress should still have never abrogated its duties.

[davidpdx]

11. You really need to do your homework

The Fed is independent of Congress so that they can not politicize monetary policy. If you really believe there should not be a Federal Reserve, you should not only not be in the Elizabeth Warren group, you shouldn't be on DU.

[pacna]

12. This bill doesn't get rid of the Federal Reserve

All this bill does is give more congressional oversight and allows the people to see what is happening at the Federal Reserve. If allowing the public to know what government operations are doing through an audit by their representatives is "politicizing monetary policy," then "politicizing" something seems to be pretty similar to "Democracy." Who is the Fed supposed to be accountable to, if not the people? An organization with complete power over monetary policy without public oversight is literally the definition of oligarchy, something I am strongly against.