Elizabeth Warren Won't Back Rand Paul's Audit the Fed Bill

Well well .... looks like Senator Warren is opposed to the "Audit the Fed" bill introduced by Senator Rand Paul.

Her statements about this quagmire are conflicting as usual.

Almost like she's scared of something .... or scared of someone.

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.

WHAT?



Then she turns around and 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,” 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.”

But Liz. Isn't it part of Congress's job to take a close look at monetary policy for the Nation?

Sen. Elizabeth Warren—that beloved populist and bank-busting champion of the little guy—has long vowed to bring accountability to the government, stop reckless corporate malfeasance, and rescue the economy from the hands of our shadowy overlords.

She does not support Sen. Rand Paul's "Audit the Fed" bill, however.

Elizabeth Warren Won't Back Rand Paul's Audit the Fed Bill

So, I read it and looked up other points of views. I think the timing is wrong. We are just crawling out of a recession for some and a depression for others. Something like that could unhinge it all again.

Other than that, Warren going along with Paul. Are you crazy?!

What a BRILLIANT IDEA.
She's afraid we'll ALL learn about how the bigest PONZI in history works and tear it down.

originally posted by: MOMof3
So, I read it and looked up other points of views. I think the timing is wrong. We are just crawling out of a recession for some and a depression for others. Something like that could unhinge it all again.

Other than that, Warren going along with Paul. Are you crazy?!

What could an audit possibly do to threaten an economic recovery ?



Lizabeth has been exposed.

originally posted by: xuenchen
What could an audit possibly do to threaten an economic recovery ?

Lizabeth has been exposed.

federalreserve.gov

It is important to note that GAO investigations are not the financial audits that many assume them to be. They extend beyond mere accounting to examine strategy, judgments and day-to-day decisionmaking. Indeed, by statute, the GAO is charged with making recommendations to Congress about the areas they have reviewed. This could put the GAO in the position of reviewing the FOMC's policy decisions and recommending its own course for monetary policy.

With these features in mind, the potential benefits of GAO policy audits would be small, even before considering the potential costs. Unlike the programs that are typically the subject of GAO policy audits, such as procurement decisions that may be brought to light only by the GAO's attention, monetary policy decisions occur with all of the world watching. They are announced immediately, described in an FOMC statement, often elaborated on in a press conference, and the subject of endless same-day-analysis and debate.

With all of this transparency and analysis, very little would be revealed by GAO policy audits that would help evaluate the effectiveness of monetary policy. The benefits of frequent GAO policy audits would also be low because the effects of monetary policy are felt with a considerable time lag and are often only clear years later.

Audit the Fed also risks inserting the Congress directly into monetary policy decisionmaking, reversing decades of deliberate effort by the Congress to insulate the Fed from political pressure in carrying out its day-to-day duties. Indeed, some advocates of the bill have expressed support for complete elimination of the Federal Reserve. Long experience, in the United States and in other advanced economies, has demonstrated that monetary policy is most successful when decisions are rendered independent of influence by elected officials. As recent U.S. history has shown, elected officials have often pushed for easier policies that serve short-term political interests, at the expense of higher inflation and damage to the long-term health and stability of the economy.

Sounds like they are talking about more than audits here...

To those who may doubt that GAO investigations would be used by the Congress to try to influence monetary policy, let me briefly describe another proposal which envisions exactly that. This bill would require the FOMC to carry out monetary policy according to a simple equation and require immediate congressional hearings and a GAO audit whenever monetary policy deviates from this equation. Simple policy rules of this nature are used by the FOMC and by central banks around the world as a guide to policy. No central bank applies them in such a mechanical fashion, and there is very little support among economists for doing so. Based on my own experience in business, in government service, and in life, I doubt that important decisions can be reduced ultimately to such an equation. The most such a rule might do is get you 80 percent of the way there; that last 20 percent makes all the difference.

I'm all for more transparency, but it sounds like there may be more to this than simply additional financial audits.

a reply to: Elton

Well OK.

I guess we can put complete trust in the opinions of the Federal Reserve itself !!

Wheew.

I was worried for a minute.

a reply to: MOMof3

Something like that could unhinge it all again.

I say if it could, then let it.

Better than digging a deeper hole to crawl out of.

Here's the bill in pdf format.

maybe somebody can point out the specifics that Lizabeth is worried about.

S.264

Are we really surprised? Warren is really just another pandering politician! Say the pretty words that will get people all warm & fuzzy, but when it comes to actual action... I am amazed how many people actually believe she is any different then the rest of the politicians.

a reply to: MOMof3

Sometimes timing is everything, and sometimes timing means nothing.

As our country's fiscal health continues down to road toward the hospital morgue, it stands to reason that even if there is some immediate, short-term negative economic reaction to this, it's best to stop the cancer at stage 4 than not to stop it at all.

The Federal Reserve is already audited by the General Accounting Office as well as independent auditors. (Source)

This is merely a political stunt by Paul.

Why would Senator Warren support a political stunt by a fringe Presidential candidate?

a reply to: hangedman13

Unlike Rand Paul who is arbiter of everything red, white, and blue. No way could Rand Paul be pandering to the Tea Party because he's not one of 'those' politicians.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

But, we are about to embark on another major war. That will last as far as one can see. I don't believe our citizens as a whole can take much more of another financial crisis, because we are the ones who pay. Can a nation sustain itself under such stress and PTSD in every family?

It's kinda like the difference between the GOP's version of how to fix Social Security & Medicare, (which is to eliminate them entirely) versus the DNC's version which is to explore news ways to fix & fund these programs to insure their longevity for future generations.

Just because they both say they're going to fix something doesn't mean that they're both on the same track.

And in case you missed it, she also staunchly opposed and ridiculed his position and public statements regarding vaccinations. Go figure!

I would fully expect to see Elizabeth Warren oppose Rand Paul on a great number of issues in the future and IMO, rightly so!.

From what I've seen so far, I'm pretty sure I'll be supporting Elizabeth Warren's position all the way.

a reply to: rockintitz

You are a spoiled generation. You can make statements like that because you believe that you will be one of the lucky ones who won't suffer.

a reply to: xuenchen

Well well .... looks like Senator Warren is opposed to the "Audit the Fed" bill introduced by Senator Rand Paul. Her statements about this quagmire are conflicting as usual. Almost like she's scared of something .... or scared of someone.

She's afraid of nothing. If a Republican was in the White House she would be all over it. This same fool was always critical of Big Pharma until just recently, now she is totally on board with them and their vaccines.

a reply to: xuenchen

From what I read, congress would turn it into another political fight and they screw up everything.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Your statements in your post are utterly mistaken.

Dated January 23, 2015 (i.e. 20 days ago)

On Thursday, the Massachusetts Democrat announced a new bill, the Medical Innovation Act, which she says would address two major problems: dwindling government investment in medical research and illegal practices by major pharmaceutical companies. The bill, which she intends to introduce in the Senate next week, would take money from fines levied against major pharmaceutical companies that engaged in illegal practices and use it to fund drug research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

(Source)

... and, a bit off-topic, supporting vaccinations does not place anyone in support of Big Pharma ... it just means that they haven't lost all reasoning.

a reply to: Gryphon66

You missed my point completely, she says Big Phama cannot be trusted, then referred to their own studies on the safety of vaccines as trustworthy.

a reply to: MOMof3

Don't get me started on the perpetual war machine that is the modern U.S. Government's philosophy.

But, yes, we could sustain anything brought about by an audit of the federal reserve. Hell, that just might create some permanent government jobs, and we all know only government can create jobs!