Sí, es este mismo, del que he estado poniendo las noticias en este hilo ultimamente.

Ron Paul tiene previsto presentar una enmienda cuando la ley vuelva al congreso para que recupere su formato original. Pero se va a necesitar que la gente vuelva a presionar mucho a los congresistas otra vez. De momento, se por otros foros de gente que ha estado llamando al despacho de Melvin "vendido" Watt para protestar y comentaban que el tipo estaba totalmente saturado y hasta los cojones de recibir llamadas.

Además, el "Liberty movement" (la manera genérica como se llama a los seguidores de Ron Paul, tea parties, etc...) se está organizando de dos maneras. Primero, unos cuantos de la zona han pedido que la gente haga carteles con la cara de este individuo y acuasandolo de vendido a los banqueros y así para colgarlos por su distrito. Y segundo, los que están involucrados en organizar los eventos de donaciones para candidatos se han puesto en contacto con un Republicano que pensaba presentarse contra Melvin Watt, para ver si las opiniones en los principios son parecidas y podría ser un buen candidato al que financiar para atacar a Melvin Watt. Estos son los que consiguieron las donaciones record para Ron Paul, y han vuelto a repetirlo con Peter Schiff, Rand Paul, y ahora la que viene hoy del 5th of November, así que para el candidato puede representar mucho dinero y un buen empujón. El tipo encaja bastante en todo, excepto quizás en la guerra, ya que es ex-militar. Aún se está mirando.

PD: Y por cierto, Rand Paul, el hijo de Ron, que se presenta a senador, ya va 3 puntos por delante del candidato republicano oficial, que hace un par de meses iba 10 puntos por delante.

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!

Ron Paul to Federal Reserve: Open your books | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times

Ron Paul to Federal Reserve: Open your books
November 5, 2009 | 9:20 am

In February, Texas Republican and Libertarian darling Ron Paul introduced a bill directing the U.S. comptroller general to audit the Federal Reserve's books.

Paul, who ran for president last year, wants the Fed to open the door on all of its secret transactions -- the talks with foreign banks, the deliberations on monetary policy, the activities of the Open Market Committee, and the communications with the regional reserve banks.

In the shadows of Wall Street's collapse last year, he has attracted more 300 co-sponsors, including 130 Democrats.

But this week, he charged, the provision was gutted from the landmark financial reform legislation being marked up by Barney Frank's Financial Services Committee. Paul blamed the chair of the subcommittee on monetary policy, North Carolina Democrat Mel Watt, whose Charlotte district is home to the headquarters of Bank of America, the nation's largest commercial bank.

Arguing that the Fed is hiding the extent of U.S. dependence on printing new money, Paul -- who is hoping to get the provision restored in the bill before it gets to the House floor -- told MSNBC today that the big spending masks a serious crisis in the value of the dollar.



Critics worry that robbing the Fed of its ability to deliberate in private will result in a weakened central financial structure -- and put Congress in charge of managing the nation's money supply.

But Paul, a physician, argues that a doctor would never hide from a cancer patient the extent of his illness, and that hiding the Fed's books amounts to kidding ourselves about the impact of its policies.

"We're still kidding ourselves," he said. "You have to bite the bullet, you have to admit the truth.... It's sort of like trying to get somebody off drugs.... Keeping them on the drug -- which is easy money, easy spending and huge deficits and all that -- that will kill the patient, and the patient for me is the dollar.... And when you see gold up at $1,100 at ounce, that's a little bit of a warning signal."

-- Johanna Neuman

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!

Airing Date Of ABC Rountable Clip: Nov.08,2009

The Federal Reserve Transparency Act (H.R. 1207), Congressman Ron Pauls landmark bill to audit the Federal Reserve, has been gutted in a House subcommittee as it works its way toward a vote in the full House. The bill, which has garnered an astonishing 308 cosponsors from both parties, has attracted the scalpel of North Carolina Democrat Mel Watt (whose district happens to include Charlotte, the home of Bank of America, Americas largest commercial bank). According to Congressman Paul, whose Campaign for Liberty posted a video on the bill last weekend, Watt has cut out just about everything in prepping the bill for a full committee vote.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.p...

Sam Donaldson: Lets Get Rid Of The Fed Now Before They Do Further Damage

Dodd es un cachorro de los banqueros, es uno de los senadores más comprados que hay. ¿Porque hace este movimiento? Porque el año que viene tiene que volver a presentarse y no va bien en las encuestas. Sobretodo se le acusa de ser corrupto así que presentar una ley que aparentemente vaya contra los bancos es su intento de limpiar su imagen.

Este es el tipo al que se enfrentará Peter Schiff si consigue la nominación republicana. Peter Schiff está acusando a Dodd de corrupto en la tele y en muchos artículos.

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!

Ron Paul is right: Audit the Federal Reserve bailout money - The Hill's Pundits Blog


Ron Paul is right: Audit the Federal Reserve bailout money
By Brent Budowsky - 11/12/09 06:53 PM ET

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has a bill with 300 sponsors that won’t pass, which is very unfortunate, but revealing. Let me suggest a variation that might pass, and would be extremely valuable:

Let’s begin with a complete audit of all bailout programs initiated by the Federal Reserve Board, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and other relevant agencies.

This audit would be all-inclusive, from top to bottom. It would include zero- to low-interest loans and financing facilities. It would include federal purchases of any form of financial instrument that was initiated in response to the financial crisis. It would include all forms of business and loan guarantees and every other program that helped any financial institution respond to the crisis.

This would be an input-output audit. It would include accounting for every penny of the trillions of dollars spent in any aspect of the bailout. It would involve accounting for how the bailout money was spent, who received the bailout money and how recipient banks and Wall Street firms used the bailout money.

For example, if banks were given zero-interest capital from the Fed, and loaned that capital through credit cards at 30 percent interest, taxpayers have a right to know this. If banks were given huge sums of zero or low-interest capital, and did not loan that money as intended, and then used that money for speculation or excessive compensation, taxpayers have a right to know this, too.

In this input-output audit, we take the Ron Paul idea and apply it to those portions of Federal Reserve, FDIC and other agency policies directly tied to the bailout, and then we apply it to the recipients of that money, to determine how it was spent.

Financially this is rational and sound. Politically this should gain bipartisan support, especially uniting legitimate conservative and progressive populists and guardians of the taxpayers’ money. This is a reasonable and manageable proposal that would have a sweeping impact assuring transparency, integrity and fairness to taxpayers.

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!

Traficant: 'Audit the Fed'

Forget the Audit: Just Abolish the Fed
By Jim Traficant

On March 17, 1993, I addressed the House of Representatives in one of the many “budget” debates. Over the past 16 years, many publications and books have reprinted my speech. They viewed my speech as being on target.

Researchers have written to me regarding the speech, confused because it was printed in two areas of the Congressional Record. My floor remarks were brief, but I inserted the entire speech into the “extension of remarks” section of the record.

Nevertheless, the speech stands today as prophetic. America is bankrupt, and it’s growing worse by the day. The U.S. government was technically dissolved by the “Emergency Banking Act” of March 9, 1933. That’s a fact.

If you have any doubt, just look around. Foreclosures and unemployment run rampant. The dollar is dropping so low it could fit under a closed door with a top hat on, yet every day the mainstream media is trying to convince us that the recession is over. Who’s kidding whom? If you take Social Security and Medicare out of our economy, it’s a full-blown depression—a total belly-up depression.

The real rub emanates from the fact that the “trustees” who preside over U.S. bankruptcy are the international bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

I proclaim that all U.S. offices, officials and departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under “Emergency War Power.”

Our constitutional form of government was technically dissolved and replaced by a so-called “democracy,” a government in actuality being a socialist-communist order under a new governor for America.

You must be thinking that I’ve lost my marbles by now—I don’t blame you. But, here come the facts. This chicanery occurred when authority was transferred and placed in the Office of the Secretary of Treasury under the governor of the International Monetary Fund. [Public Law 94-564].

In essence, the dollar was changed from a “promise to pay a dollar in silver or gold” to a “federal reserve note.” Now think about it: the dollar became a “promise,” not “money.”

The U.S. dollar is a debt instrument, nothing more than another debt obligation of the American people. And where is this obligation to be paid? You probably guessed it, to the Federal Reserve Bank.

Let’s tell it like it is.

Federal Reserve notes are literally unsigned checks written on a closed account. It’s nothing more than inflatable paper creating more debt through inflation every time our currency is devalued.

Truth is, inflation is actually another tax; invisible, never seen, but a tax just the same.

I don’t know about you, but I always thought that a “contract” under common law is only valid if it involves an exchange of some “good and valuable consideration.”

If that’s not enough to frost your pumpkins, check this out: The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the U.S. government. It is in fact, a private corporation.

We, the people of these United States, owe this private corporation consisting of international bankers a mountain of debt. The collateral on this debt is our very own homes and properties.

We the people are nothing more than tenants and sharecroppers, renting our own property from the Federal Reserve Bank. Most Americans are mortgaged to the hilt with few or no assets, working harder and profiting less, constantly in debt to a private corporation they know little or nothing about. BEAM ME UP.

This has gone on way too long—WAKE UP AMERICA. This is nothing more than economic slavery to a bunch of international fat cats.

Our Constitution has been turned upside down, violated and discarded like toilet paper. Unbelievable.

It’s not rocket science folks—CONGRESS SHALL COIN MONEY, so mandates the Constitution. It’s very clear to me: the Federal Reserve System should be abolished, not just audited so the politicians can feel good, but abolished. Enough is enough. In closing I say “audit this.”

Next week—AIPAC. You don’t want to miss it.

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!

Wednesday, November 18, 2009
6 Congress Members Demand Complete Audit of Fed in Light of AIG Counterparty Fiasco

The Honorable Barney
Chairman, House Financial Services Committee
2129 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Christopher Dodd
Chairman, Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs
534 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Chairman Frank and Chairman Dodd:

In light of Tuesday’s report released by the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Assets Relief Program, Neil Barofsky – Factors Affecting Efforts to Limit Payments to AIG Counterparties – we write to request your assistance in addressing major issues displayed prominently in the report.

On March 25, 2009, I requested, joined by 26 fellow members of Congress, that Mr. Barofsky investigate the events surrounding AIG’s payments to Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Societe Generale and other firms to settle certain open derivative transactions.

As a result of the findings in the report, there should be a comprehensive Congressional review of the Federal Reserve System and an exploration of possible changes in its governance model. More immediately, a complete and public audit of the system should be made part of the regulatory reform bills currently moving through your committees.

The following issues illustrate a set of circumstances that grant tremendous power to a body that is subject to minimal accountability, thus giving rise to my *********

First, Mr. Barofsky cites the unwillingness on the part of officials at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) to negotiate “haircuts” with AIG counterparties. FRBNY has argued that it was acting as an AIG creditor, not as a regulator. I believe it is intellectually disingenuous to separate these roles in this case, [1] and frankly, how effective a regulator can the Federal Reserve be if it is unwilling to strive for good public policy through its regulatory powers?

Second, there is an inherent conflict in the manner in which regional reserve branch presidents are selected – in that representatives of the member banks select the regional president. It seems counterproductive, yet the banking system has provided case after case of regulated entities selecting their own regulator.

Third, the Federal Reserve has continually resisted efforts to engage in discussion on structural and governance reform at the System. Most recently, Bloomberg reported yesterday that the Federal Reserve has rejected a White House request that [the Federal Reserve] conduct a public review of its structure and operations.

Despite a request from the administration that provided ample opportunity for the Federal Reserve to have input into its own reforms, the central bank has simply refused. It is because of this attitude that I argue that real financial regulatory reform cannot occur without an examination into the structure of this entity.

Fourth, and most importantly, the Federal Reserve has shown a repeated unwillingness to accept efforts to improve transparency for the System.

As we are reminded in the report, it was only through your persistence, Chairman Dodd, that we were finally able to grasp the nature and extent of the counterparty payments. Despite repeated objections by the Federal Reserve System that the release of this information would have a detrimental effect on the health of AIG, their counterparties, and the markets, we now have the requested information, and the markets continue to ********. As Mr. Barofsky stated – “the sky did not fall”.

As I and so many others have stated since the bailout first began – transparency must be the hallmark of any use of government funds.

Concluding, we respectfully request that for the reasons enunciated herein, that a Congressional examination of the governance structure at the Federal Reserve be undertaken, and also that the regulatory reform bills moving through your committees include a complete and public audit of the Federal Reserve System. The actions requested would shine much needed-light on this creature of Congress.

Please contact me or Martin Levine on my staff at 202.225.4741 or at martin.levine@mail.house.gov with questions.

Sincerely,

Elijah E. Cummings

Lloyd Doggett

Alan Grayson

Maurice Hinchey

John F. Tierney

Tim Walz

Peter Welch


Washington's Blog



[1] Mr. Barofsky points out that Treasury and the Federal Reserve were willing to use their power as regulators in order to get banks to accept the initial $125 billion of TARP funding.

La propuesta de Watt para recortar la capacidad de auditar la Reserva Federal de la ley de Ron Paul podría votarse esta semana.

Campaign For Liberty — Critical Vote on Audit the Fed This Thursday!

Critical Vote on Audit the Fed This Thursday!

A few weeks ago, we sent out an alert that Representative Mel Watt was attempting to water down H.R. 1207 in the House Financial Services Committee.

The latest reports we have received have informed us that a vote on the Watt amendment could come tomorrow!

There's still time for us to stop this attack on Audit the Fed! Click here to get a full list of Financial Services Committee members, along with their contact information.

Financial Services leadership seems determined to include Audit the Fed as part of a regulatory reform package instead of passing it as a standalone bill.

While C4L will still do everything in its power to fight for a standalone vote on Audit the Fed on the House floor, it is critical we challenge Watt's amendment in Committee.

It will become much easier for our representatives to claim they still support Audit the Fed on the House floor if the Watt version passes, when, in reality, Representative Watt's amendment puts restrictions on Government Accountability Office audits of the Fed.

For example, Watt's amendment prevents the GAO from auditing or reviewing decisions to authorize, modify, extend, or terminate loans or liquidity facilities.

Congressman Paul will offer an amendment in Committee restoring an audit of the Fed's entire $2 trillion balance sheet, but we have received word that some of the Democrat members may be waffling on their support for his amendment.

Help us turn up the pressure on these members! Below is the list of Democrats on the committee who have cosponsored H.R. 1207. Please call them and urge them to vote "Yes" on Ron Paul's amendment. Click on their names to get their web contact information.

1. Rep. John Adler, NJ (202) 225-4765

2. Rep. Travis Childers, MS (202) 225-4306

3. Rep. Steve Driehaus, OH (202) 225-2216

4. Rep. Alan Grayson, FL (202) 225-2176

5. Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, TX (202) 225-2531

6. Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, FL Toll Free: 1-877-956-7627

7. Rep. Dan Maffei, NY (202) 225-3701

8. Rep. Brad Miller, NC (202) 225-3032

9. Rep. Walt Minnick, ID (202) 225-6611

10. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, CO (202)-225-2645

11. Rep. David Scott, GA (202) 225-2939

12. Rep. Brad Sherman, CA (202) 225-5911

13. Rep. Jackie Speier, CA (202) 225-3531

When contacting these members, remember that up to this point, they have been allies on this issue. A civil yet firm tone should be kept during these calls. They should be thanked for their cosponsorship, told that Mel Watt's changes to the bill are unacceptable, and urged to hold the line and honor their promise to support transparency at the Fed by voting "Yes" on Ron Paul's amendment.

And don't forget to click here to get a full list of Financial Services Committee members.

For more information on the Watt amendment, check out this article by The Huffington Post's Ryan Grim.

We are continuing our work to achieve a standalone vote on H.R. 1207 on the House floor, but we must first stop the Watt amendment in the Financial Services Committee.

Make sure the Financial Services Committee members hear from you as soon as their offices open Thursday morning!

A vote could come any time tomorrow. Call, email, and fax the Financial Services Committee members to vote "Yes" on Congressman Ron Paul's amendment.

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!

Lo que para muchos era ya evidente.

Economists Opposing Fed Audit Have Undisclosed Fed Ties

Los economistas que se oponen a la auditoría tienen relación directa con la Fed

As the debate over an audit of the Federal Reserve intensifies in the House, one camp is trotting out eight academics that it calls a "political cross section of prominent economists."

A review of their backgrounds shows they are anything but.

In a letter to the House Financial Services Committee earlier this month, all eight wrote that they support the type of amendment now being introduced by Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.). Watt's approach purports to increase Fed transparency while it actually would tighten restrictions on any audits that could go forward.

The letter was sent around Wednesday by Watt's staff to members of the committee in advance of a vote scheduled for Thursday.

Watt's measure is in competition with an amendment cosponsored by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), which would repeal the restrictions that Watt leaves in place.

But far from a broad cross-section, the "prominent economists" lobbying on behalf of the Watt bill are in fact deeply involved with the Federal Reserve. Seven of the eight are either currently on the Fed's payroll or have been in the past.

The Fed connections are not outlined in the letter sent around to committee members on Wednesday, but are publicly discernible through a review of their resumes, which are all posted online.

In September, Huffington Post reported that the Federal Reserve has accomplished a soft form of effective control over the field of monetary economics simply by employing -- and being the means for career advance -- for an overwhelming proportion of the discipline.
Story continues below

Now that the Fed is locked in a legislative battle on the Hill, it can call on those economists to give their "unvarnished" opinions to lawmakers.

The connections that the seven economists lobbying Congress have to the Fed are not incidental and four of them maintain current positions.

Let's run the traps:

Frederic Mishkin is a former board member, having served from 2006-2008. His career at the Fed stretches back to 1977 and he currently holds two positions: one as a member of the Center for Latin American Economics at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, where he's been since 1996; and another as an academic consultant to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he's been since 1997.

Anil K. Kashyap is currently a consultant with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, a position he's held since 1991. He's also on the economic advisory panel of the New York branch and was a consultant there in 2003. He was a visiting scholar at the division of monetary affairs at the Board of Governors of in1994, 2001 and 2005 and at the division of international finance in 1997.

Pete Klenow was a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 1994-1999, 2003-2004, 2006 and again this year. From 2000-2003 he was also a senior economist at that branch. He's currently a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, a position he's held since 2005. He was a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City from 2004-2006.

Ricardo J. Caballero was a visiting scholar at Federal Reserve Bank of Boston from 2004-2005 and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Board on multiple occasions.

Robert Hall was a research assistant at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System from 1982-1984 and an economist there from 1988-1991.

Thomas Sargent was an adviser to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 1981 to 1987 and continues to write frequently for Fed-sponsored journals.

Micheal Woodford is currently on the Monetary Policy Advisory Committee of Federal Reserve Bank of New York, a position he's held since 2004. He's also listed as a consultant to the research department there dating back to 2005. In the past, he's been a visiting scholar at the Board of Governors and various regional branches in 1987, 1993-1998 and 2000-present, often at multiple banks in the same year.

Economists with Fed connections strongly reject the notion that being paid by the bank influences their thinking. But Robert Auerbach, who spent years investigating the institution and is the author of "Deception and Abuse at the Fed", says that those economists are simply in denial. "If you're on the Fed payroll there's a conflict of interest," says Auerbach.

The tie between the economists backing Watt's amendment and the Fed doesn't by itself mean that it's bad policy, but it does make clear which amendment is favored by the Federal Reserve. If there's still any doubt, the e-mail from Watt staff notes that former Fed chairs Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker also support a version of it.

Meanwhile, a broad coalition of liberal organizations is lining up behind the Paul-Grayson amendment, which also has the backing of most Republicans on the committee.

The AFL-CIO and other labor groups, as well as Americans for Financial Reform signed on to a letter posted Wednesday calling for committee members to back the Paul-Grayson approach.

"In creating the Federal Reserve nearly 100 years ago, the Congress envisioned a central bank free from political pressure. But the structure that may have once ensured independence now appears to put the Fed much closer to the financial industry than the American people, who deserve to know who the beneficiaries are," reads the letter.

The Fed, in other words, is not presently independent of political pressure, but that pressure comes from Wall Street banks rather than from the American people through their elected representatives.

It's a distinction that the note from Watt's staff on Wednesday subtly acknowledges, by focusing on legislative and executive branch pressure, rather than financial industry influence. The Paul-Grayson amendment, it warns, "would place the United States well outside of the mainstream of industrialized nations that shield their central banks from political interference by the Legislative and Executive branches of government, with potentially disastrous results to the U.S. economy."

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!

Tres videos sobre la sesión de esta semana para evitar que se descafeine la ley

Aún no tengo confirmación pero creo que se ha evitado, y que la ley de momento tira para adelante completa según la escribió Ron Paul, y los intentos del congresista Mel Watt de cambiarla han fallado.

__________________

Unete a la red libre guifi.net
Errores Puntuales - !Mamá, está vez es diferente!