So the government CAN agree on something, and rather quickly... Fed Audit shot down

P

plushcarpet

Superstar
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
3,536
Reputation
445
Daps
13,032
Domingo Halliburton said:
I don't know why you guys bytch about this. They returned like $98 billion to the Treasury.

Even the wonderful Elizabeth Warren voted against it.
Click to expand...
why are they against it if they got nothing to hide? :mjpls:
that's what they told us about the NSA isn't it? :mjpls:
 
P

plushcarpet

Superstar
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
3,536
Reputation
445
Daps
13,032
Napoleon said:
yeah
Click to expand...
Bolded parts are some of the quotes

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) dismissed Paul’s proposal as a “sham.”

“Republicans have been trying to undermine the Federal Reserve mandate to strive toward full employment,” he added on Tuesday morning.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), the ranking member of the Banking Committee, added ahead of the vote that the legislation “really solves nothing but to politicize the Fed.”

For Paul, the vote in the Senate was a chance to grab the spotlight ahead of a weekend trip to New Hampshire, the second contest in the Republican primary.

After a promising start, he has struggled to break out in the field and is now coming in near the bottom of the polls.

Fox Business Network announced that the Kentucky Republican didn’t qualify for the main-stage debate on Thursday night, and Paul has refused to participate in the earlier undercard bout.

Republicans broadly argue that recent policy decisions by the Federal Reserve — including its handling of the 2008 financial crisis — underscore the need for more oversight of the powerful central bank.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who is up for reelection in November, said that while he had been skeptical of Paul’s legislation, “the dangerous behavior that the Fed has engaged in for years now means they have squandered the right to be independent.”

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, had previously voiced opposition to Paul’s proposal, but voted Tuesday to move forward with it.

“I think we ought to debate it,” he told reporters on Monday evening. “I’m interested in oversight and that might be what he’s interested in.”

Federal Reserve officials have fought fiercely against Paul’s legislation, suggesting that it would allow Congress to weigh in on financial policy “in real time.”

Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen sent a letter to Senate leadership late last week saying that she opposes the bill and warning, if signed into law, it could damage the economy.

The White House last year called Paul’s proposal “dangerous.”

“What that bill is about is about Congress supplanting its judgment as to what monetary policy should be,” said Jason Furman, chairman of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers. “Congress shouldn’t be telling the Fed what to do with monetary policy.”

Business groups had also expressed strong opposition to the bill.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the most powerful industry lobby in Washington, issued an open letter urging senators to vote against the legislation, calling it “unnecessary.”

“Creating outside pressures that could politicize monetary policy decisions would likely harm the market foundations needed to fuel the free enterprise system,” wrote Bruce Josten, the Chamber’s executive vice president of government affairs.

Tuesdays’ vote was the first time Paul’s legislation was allowed to come up.

Conservative groups rallied behind the measure, with FreedomWorks legislative affairs manager Josh Withrow saying late last week that if central banks “have nothing to hide from the American people, they shouldn’t fear transparency.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top