• Ron Paul's ‘Audit the Fed' bill passes the House
    60 replies, posted
Source: [URL]http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/ron-pauls-audit-fed-bill-passes-house/story?id=16855319#.UBD5DqP_mdB[/URL] [QUOTE] At long last, Ron Paul has his day. The House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved the Texas Republican's bill to increase the transparency of the Federal Reserve. With bipartisan support, the measure passed 327-98. For Paul, the path to getting his bill approved in the House has been a long, and often lonely one. He first introduced the bill to a skeptical House a decade ago. While his efforts were ignored at the time, the call to audit the Fed" has gained support from mainstream Republicans and Democrats. On the presidential campaign trail in 2008, Paul spoke often about the need to make more of the Federal Reserve's activities public, a cause that became a rallying cry of his supporters. Paul's book,[I]End The Fed, [/I]was published in September 2009, and he continued his crusade against the federal bank into his second run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. (Paul first ran for president as the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988.) Paul's bill came to the floor Wednesday with 270 co-sponsors. The measure also received support from his fellow Republican presidential candidates during the primaries. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, most recently voiced his approval for Paul's efforts last week. "Ron Paul's 'Audit The Fed' bill is a reminder of his tireless efforts to promote sound money and a more transparent Federal Reserve," Romney posted on Twitter. The bill, of course, is not without critics. Democrats say the Act could "politicize" the Federal Reserve's decisions--what Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has called a "nightmare scenario." "This bill would ... jeopardize the Fed's independence by subjecting its decisions on interest rates and monetary policy to GAO audit," said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, a Democrat from Maryland. "I agree with Chairman Bernanke that congressional review of the Fed's monetary policy decisions would be a 'nightmare scenario,' especially judging by the track record of this Congress when it comes to governing effectively." While Wednesday's passage in the lower chamber is a victory for Paul and his supporters, the bill is considered dead on arrival in the Senate. Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and Nevada Democrat, has vowed not to put it to a vote. [/QUOTE] Now it only needs to pass the senate and get Obama's approval. Please contact your senators and tell them to support this if you live in the USA. Remember that the Fed's desire for independence is in reality a desire for unaccountability and secrecy. The current co-sponsors in the senate are the folowing: Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] - 1/26/2011 Sen Vitter, David [LA] - 1/26/2011 Sen Lee, Mike [UT] - 3/1/2011 Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] - 5/24/2011 Sen Boozman, John [AR] - 5/24/2011 Sen Heller, Dean [NV] - 6/22/2011 Sen Chambliss, Saxby [GA] - 7/25/2011 Sen Crapo, Mike [ID] - 9/6/2011 Sen Risch, James E. [ID] - 10/6/2011 Sen Rubio, Marco [FL] - 10/6/2011 Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] - 10/6/2011 Sen Blunt, Roy [MO] - 10/6/2011 Sen Barrasso, John [WY] - 10/6/2011 Sen Burr, Richard [NC] - 10/6/2011 Sen Thune, John [SD] - 10/6/2011 Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK] - 10/6/2011 Sen Wicker, Roger F. [MS] - 10/6/2011 Sen McCain, John [AZ] - 10/31/2011 Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 10/31/2011 Sen Cornyn, John [TX] - 3/28/2012 The 98 traitors who voted against this (congressional representatives): Sewell, Terri - AL 7th Matsui, Doris - CA 5th Woolsey, Lynn - CA 6th Miller, George - CA 7th Pelosi, Nancy - CA 8th Lee, Barbara - CA 9th Stark, Fortney “Pete” - CA 13th Eshoo, Anna - CA 14th Cardoza, Dennis - CA 18th Capps, Lois - CA 23rd Waxman, Henry - CA 30th Becerra, Xavier - CA 31st Chu, Judy - CA 32nd Bass, Karen - CA 33rd Roybal-Allard, Lucille - CA 34th Napolitano, Grace - CA 38th Sánchez, Linda - CA 39th Davis, Susan - CA 53rd DeGette, Diana - CO 1st Larson, John - CT 1st DeLauro, Rosa - CT 3rd Himes, James - CT 4th Carney, John - DE Brown, Corrine - FL 3rd Castor, Kathy - FL 11th Wilson, Frederica FL 17th Deutch, Ted - FL 19th Wasserman Schultz, Debbie - FL 20th Hastings, Alcee - FL 23r Johnson, Henry “Hank” - GA 4th Lewis, John - GA 5th Hanabusa, Colleen - HI 1st Rush, Bobby - IL 1st Gutiérrez, Luis - IL 4th Davis, Danny - IL 7th Schakowsky, Janice “Jan” - IL 9th Carson, André - IN 7th Olver, John - MA 1st Neal, Richard - MA 2nd Frank, Barney - MA 4th Markey, Edward “Ed” - MA 7th Capuano, Michael - MA 8th Keating, William - MA 10th Sarbanes, John - MD 3rd Edwards, Donna - MD 4th Hoyer, Steny - MD 5th Cummings, Elijah - MD 7th Van Hollen, Christopher “Chris” - MD 8th Peters, Gary - MI 9th Levin, Sander - MI 12th Conyers, John - MI 14th Dingell, John - MI 15th McCollum, Betty - MN 4th Ellison, Keith - MN 5th Cleaver, Emanuel - MO 5th Thompson, Benni - MS 2nd Butterfield, George “G.K.” - NC 1st Price, David - NC 4th Shuler, Heath - NC 11th Watt, Melvin “Mel” - NC 12th Miller, Bradley “Brad” - NC 13t Andrews, Robert “Rob” - NJ 1st Pallone, Frank - NJ 6th Rothman, Steven - NJ 9th Holt, Rush - NJ 12th Sires, Albio - NJ 13th Israel, Steve - NY 2nd Ackerman, Gary - NY 5th Meeks, Gregory - NY 6th Crowley, Joseph - NY 7th Turner, Robert - NY 9th <------------ The only republican who voted nay Towns, Edolphus “Ed” - NY 10th Velázquez, Nydia - NY 12th Maloney, Carolyn - NY 14th Rangel, Charles - NY 15th Serrano, José - NY 16th Engel, Eliot - NY 17th Lowey, Nita - NY 18th Hinchey, Maurice - NY 22nd Slaughter, Louise - NY 28th Kaptur, Marcy - OH 9th Fudge, Marcia - OH 11th Ryan, Timothy - OH 17th Bonamici, Suzanne - OR 1st Blumenauer, Earl - OR 3rd Brady, Robert - PA 1st Fattah, Chaka - PA 2nd Schwartz, Allyson - PA 13th Clyburn, James “Jim” - SC 6th Cooper, Jim - TN 5th Reyes, Silvestre - TX 16th Gonzalez, Charles “Charlie” - TX 20th Larsen, Rick - WA 2nd Dicks, Norman “Norm” - WA 6th McDermott, James “Jim” - WA 7th Kind, Ronald “Ron” - WI 3rd Moore, Gwen - WI 4th
I'm all for government transparency, but calling the people who voted against it "traitors" is sort of ridiculous.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;36941198]I'm all for government transparency, but calling the people who voted against it "traitors" is sort of ridiculous.[/QUOTE] The Federal Reserve is not part of the government. It's a secretive private corporation with a special government-given privilige to manipulate money.
So wait 97 democrats voted against this? I thought liberals were the good guys! But its surprising if what the OP says is true that only one Republican voted against this...
If any of you have no idea about the Federal Reserve and its implications, here have a gander at this: [video=youtube;ZPWH5TlbloU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWH5TlbloU[/video] Edit: Okay well I'm not the brightest and since everyone here keeps saying that this video is false, I'll have to agree and discard these ideas but I'll just keep it posted for your entertainment.
[QUOTE=plokoon9619;36941554]So wait 97 democrats voted against this? I thought liberals were the good guys! But its surprising if what the OP says is true that only one Republican voted against this...[/QUOTE] Most Democrats aren't liberal by the traditional definition. They fall solidly as moderates. It's also important to understand that the Democratic party is not as lockstep as the Republican party when it comes to voting. The left v right, liberal v conservative, Democrats = Republicans two sides of the same story schtick is mostly a fabrication of mass media.
[QUOTE=GlebGuy;36941564]If any of you have no idea about the Federal Reserve and its implications, here have a gander at this: [video=youtube;ZPWH5TlbloU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWH5TlbloU[/video][/QUOTE] That is the most hilariously misinformative bias of conspiracy nut nuttiness I've seen since Glenn Beck was on the air. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=plokoon9619;36941554]So wait 97 democrats voted against this? I thought liberals were the good guys! But its surprising if what the OP says is true that only one Republican voted against this...[/QUOTE] Liberal =/= libertarian. Republicans are more often libertarians.
[quote=article]While Wednesday's passage in the lower chamber is a victory for Paul and his supporters, the bill is considered dead on arrival in the Senate. Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and Nevada Democrat, has vowed not to put it to a vote.[/quote] Fuck.
[QUOTE=mac338;36941787] Liberal =/= libertarian. Republicans are more often libertarians.[/QUOTE] Most Republicans are corporatist who are libertarian when it suits them.
[QUOTE=mac338;36941787]That is the most hilariously misinformative bias of conspiracy nut nuttiness I've seen since Glenn Beck was on the air.[/QUOTE] Oh... Well thanks for clearing that up for me.
Federal Reserve has it's own police but are a private corp.
[QUOTE=GlebGuy;36941564]If any of you have no idea about the Federal Reserve and its implications, here have a gander at this: [video=youtube;ZPWH5TlbloU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWH5TlbloU[/video][/QUOTE] Oh, I remember this. You can play a drinking game with how many fallacious arguments it uses.
[QUOTE=GlebGuy;36941564]If any of you have no idea about the Federal Reserve and its implications, here have a gander at this: [video=youtube;ZPWH5TlbloU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWH5TlbloU[/video][/QUOTE] oh yeah i'll trust a cartoon on youtube when it comes to serious domestic issues.
That evil banking tentacle robot looks kinda cool. Can I get in on this conspiracy thing?
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;36942803]Oh, I remember this. You can play a drinking game with how many fallacious arguments it uses.[/QUOTE] Tom Waits is the only person to have tried that and survived.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;36941662] The left v right, liberal v conservative, Democrats = Republicans two sides of the same story schtick is mostly a fabrication of mass media.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5A9-dHdt46Q/TLvFEXO3xVI/AAAAAAAAAss/Xo0x_nSfe7U/s1600/usprimaries_2008.png[/IMG] the media tries to portray the opposite: that democrats are completely different than the republicans, when in fact most democrats aren't even leftists.
Must be awkward being the only party member to vote nay.
[quote]Democrats say the Act could "politicize" the Federal Reserve's decisions--what Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has called a "nightmare scenario." "This bill would ... jeopardize the Fed's independence by subjecting its decisions on interest rates and monetary policy to GAO audit," said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, a Democrat from Maryland. "I agree with Chairman Bernanke that congressional review of the Fed's monetary policy decisions would be a 'nightmare scenario,' especially judging by the track record of this Congress when it comes to governing effectively."[/quote] "they'd actually have to be held responsible for what they do! we can't let this happen!"
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36941827]Fuck.[/QUOTE] My thoughts exactly. How is it democratic at all to not let a bill come to a vote? It's bullshit.
[quote]Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and Nevada Democrat, has vowed not to put it to a vote.[/quote] Harry Reid - "I think we should audit the Fed": [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXOsZ7Ad7dM[/media] What's with the flip flop? Or is he planning to reject it just because Republicans sponsored it?
[QUOTE=Noble;36944181]Harry Reid - "I think we should audit the Fed": [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXOsZ7Ad7dM[/media] What's with the flip flop? Or is he planning to reject it just because Republicans sponsored it?[/QUOTE] Possibly, but it could also be that he just no longer believes that the Fed is the proper target. As far as I could see, auditing the Federal Reserve *might* negatively affect our currency, but it almost certainly will fail to accomplish anything, where as other bank regulations would be far more effective at actually stabilizing the economy.
[QUOTE=Noble;36944181]What's with the flip flop?[/QUOTE] He's a politician :v:
But I can't know what Senator Reid is thinking. [editline]damnit[/editline] Broke my automerge...
[QUOTE=gra;36943437][IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5A9-dHdt46Q/TLvFEXO3xVI/AAAAAAAAAss/Xo0x_nSfe7U/s1600/usprimaries_2008.png[/IMG] the media tries to portray the opposite: that democrats are completely different than the republicans, when in fact most democrats aren't even leftists.[/QUOTE] That's not really an accurate standard of measurement. The political spectrum is all perspective, and standards differ from country to country.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;36944508]That's not really an accurate standard of measurement. The political spectrum is all perspective, and standards differ from country to country.[/QUOTE] It doesn't take into account people who actually hold views from different sides.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;36944548]It doesn't take into account people who actually hold views from different sides.[/QUOTE] Honestly what the hell is Libertarian left? The party is based off conservatism. The only difference I can see is a right Libertarian is one that hijacks it with religion or something and left is one that doesn't. But that doesn't make the party left in any sense.
[QUOTE=Chicken_Chaser;36944695]The only difference I can see is a right Libertarian is one that hijacks it with religion or something and left is one that doesn't.[/QUOTE] no
[QUOTE=Noble;36944714]no[/QUOTE] Okay hows about you explain because I'm not looking for a pissing match
[QUOTE=Chicken_Chaser;36944695]Honestly what the hell is Libertarian left? The party is based off conservatism. The only difference I can see is a right Libertarian is one that hijacks it with religion or something and left is one that doesn't. But that doesn't make the party left in any sense.[/QUOTE] The U.S. Libertarian party isn't based off of conservative ideals. It's just not based on liberal ideals either. It's pretty much the middle party, at the moment. "The Libertarian Party is the third largest[2] and fastest growing[3] political party in the United States. The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects the ideas of libertarianism, favoring minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets, strong civil liberties, drug liberalization, LGBT rights (such as in marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws), separation of church and state, minimally regulated migration across borders, and non-interventionism and diplomacy in foreign policy, i.e., avoiding foreign military or economic entanglements with other nations and respect for freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries."
[QUOTE=Gordy H.;36944818]The U.S. Libertarian party isn't based off of conservative ideals. It's just not based on liberal ideals either. It's pretty much the middle party, at the moment. "The Libertarian Party is the third largest[2] and fastest growing[3] political party in the United States. The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects the ideas of libertarianism, [b]favoring minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets,[/b] strong civil liberties([b]but they won't actually do anything to stop discrimination when intervention is needed[/b], drug liberalization, LGBT rights (such as in marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws), separation of church and state, minimally regulated migration across borders, and non-interventionism and diplomacy in foreign policy, i.e., avoiding foreign military or economic entanglements with other nations and respect for freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries."[/QUOTE] I was under the impression that not wanting progressive taxes and allowing the free market to reign and being against welfare and other government programs = conservative. Or is conservative being redefined because of modern Republicans even though Paul and Libertarian politicians like saying they're the true conservatives (in theory libertarians are)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.