Congress.jpgIf Ben Bernanke thought he could keep the Fed (semi)-independent of the rest of Washington, he may get a rude awakening soon. Congress is looking to provide the GAO with the authority to audit all of the Fed’s activities. The thought of greater Congressional scrutiny has to make Bernanke reach for the Pepto and hope that he doesn’t wake up in a cold sweat haunted by the vision of Maxine Waters marching down the corridors of the Fed trying to fire every ex-Goldman employee herself. Best of luck Ben.
Congress seeks to open Fed actions to more scrutiny [FT]

Comments (29)

  1. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    Not going to happen.

  2. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:05 PM

    you mean the Fed would have to face checks and balances by the elected representatives of the american public?
    UNFAIR!

  3. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:05 PM

    @1- but it’d be good for a laugh if it did (the Waters scenario, that is).

  4. Posted by american bandersnatch | June 5, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @2 – Agreed. Screw the decades of good performance by the Fed – Congress will do a better job.

  5. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:14 PM

    as long as that delicious MILF Betty McCollum (D-MN) swishes her tookus down the aisle, everything will be hunky-dory

  6. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:15 PM

    @4
    I’m not so sure about the Fed’s performance in the past, but I do know that if it were ran by Congress, you may as well have a deranged child running monetary policy, because the outcome would be the same.
    “Oh, what does this lever do? OMG it prints more money! WAHOO!”

  7. Posted by HeadlessHorseman | June 5, 2009 at 4:16 PM

    Greg,
    This is better.

  8. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:16 PM

    it’s “tuchus.”

  9. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:17 PM

    bunch of fucking fascists on this site.
    You’d all vote for President Saddam if he were still alive

  10. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:17 PM

    AB,
    Oversight for the Fed is a wonderful thing; although, you just pissed in my pudding by noting Congress would be the overlords. Wouldn’t it make more sense just to post information on a gov site, accessible by all?

  11. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:24 PM

    Where is the silly commentary from the that split personnality TGFD/TOGFD when we need it? Step up gents! Maxine is awaiting your collective wisdom.

  12. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:25 PM

    ANUS!

  13. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:25 PM

    The Fed can’t inspect itself.
    Proof:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJqM2tFOxLQ&feature=channel

  14. Posted by NAS Keflavik boi | June 5, 2009 at 4:27 PM

    the fucking fed is unconstitutional – they oughta be keelhauled and given a donkeypunch

  15. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:41 PM

    So who is going to monitor Congress? I nominate a clandestine group of ex-bankers turned ninjas.

  16. Posted by Anal_yst | June 5, 2009 at 4:41 PM

    @6 just made me snarf coffee, bastard haha

  17. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:43 PM

    Anyone who thinks it would be good to give Congress more room to meddle with the Fed, please see Bess’s earlier post.
    http://dealbreaker.com/2009/06/presented-without-comment-9.php
    GAO reporting to a .gov website? Sure, but I don’t think I can stomach seeing much more Congressional grandstanding.

  18. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 4:53 PM

    Greg,
    I had a really nasty post planned for you when I got home from work today (Can’t post at work due to compliance). It had a really good joke in it too (at your expense), but here you are with your first decent post. Does it feel good inside? I love you Greg. You are the best. Have a great weekend!

  19. Posted by Novice | June 5, 2009 at 4:59 PM

    @14 Stick with killing Cherokee in your own century, Andrew Jackson.

  20. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 5:01 PM

    About time someone looked into the biggest hedge fund in the history of the planet, namely the Fed. Oh, the IG that Bernanke claims is watching their activities has NO CLUE what is going on. Look at the youtube of Alan Grayson grilling the know-nothing IG at the Fed.

  21. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 5:14 PM

    @9, 13, 20:
    It’s posts like these that give humanity hope.
    All you people appeasing the calamity that is the Federal Reserve System will soon regret it. Sure, you have cash, a house, nice car, wife (secretary on the side!), kids & comfort. Wait until the SHTF.
    zeitgeist.com
    -TOGFD.

  22. Posted by NegativeConvexity | June 5, 2009 at 5:15 PM

    @14 & 20,
    Well said, young fellas. Both you and Bloomberg know it’s time to audit the FED.
    -Ron Paul
    “To create man was a quaint and original idea, but to add the sheep was tautology”

  23. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 5:23 PM

    Well, kicker is at the end:
    “In addition to pressure for more Fed disclosure, there has been talk of a renewed effort to strip the regional Fed presidents, who are appointed by local boards and have often been more hawkish than the Washington DC-based Fed governors, of votes at the federal open market committee.”
    Regionals losing power would be a very bad thing – although of course viewed as positive for the power hungry fucks in DC.

  24. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 5:45 PM

    @ 21: OMG! Look who is back! TOGFD Where have you been? I was going to pound your secretary in the ass until she said she was your Mom. That kinda grossed me out….just saying

  25. Posted by Novice | June 5, 2009 at 6:03 PM

    @23 the true implication would be to end the Fed as a public-private hybrid and consolidate congressional control.
    Regional Fed presidents are chosen by their boards, 2/3rds of whom are chosen by the member banks for that district.

  26. Posted by Novice | June 5, 2009 at 6:05 PM

    … and you noted that; I just can’t read

  27. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM

    Regional Fed presidents act in the interest of the member banks, not the taxpaying public. That’s why I was convinced that Geithner was not going to be any better than say, someone like Paulson. But since we are all bankers here (yeah right!) lets not rock the boat.
    There’s a lot of information that the fed is hiding to protect the banks (us bankers, right?). Not good when now too much public money is at risk.

  28. Posted by guest | June 5, 2009 at 10:16 PM

    The Fed’s evil. Eeeeeevil. This now reveals that I am not a banker.

  29. Posted by guest | June 6, 2009 at 12:59 PM

    @9 – Go kill yourself.

Leave a comment

You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.