Sanders Concerned White House May Kill Fed Audit Amendment

[t0dd]

Source: TalkingPointsMemo

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has rounded up an impressive, bipartisan array of cosponsors to an amendment he authored requiring an audit of the Federal Reserve. Just today, he added Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) to a list that includes 12 Republicans, seven Democrats, in addition to Sanders himself.

In the past, a different version of legislation opening up the fed to audit received 59 votes--one shy of the 60 required to break a filibuster. But eight of the Republicans who voted no are now cosponsors of Sanders' amendment. That should mean it's a shoo-in, right?

Not necessarily.

"Am I concerned that some of the most powerful and wealthiest people in the world are in opposition to my amendment, people who have run the United States Congress for decades?" Sanders asked reporters rhetorically before a caucus meeting today. "Do I have any worry about that? Yeah. I do."

"Do I think we're going to get a vote? Yes. Do I think we have a chance to get 60 votes? Yes."

When I asked, though, whether he worried that the White House might succeed in peeling away Democratic support for his amendment--just as they did during the health care debate vis-a-vis a popular drug reimportation amendment--Sanders acknowledged it was a real possibility.

And indeed, it's early to assume that prior support for the idea of auditing the Fed will translate into a vote for Sanders' amendment.

Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/sanders-conc...

[Enrique]

1. Geithner!

[DJ13]

2. Exactly

This is why the Rubin alums are spread out throughout the government.

Its a hedge to keep their criminal enterprise a secret from the public, and when Obama selected Geithner for Treasury he insured there would be no real reforms.

[No Elephants]

17. Look at who Sanders says it is--people who have run Congress for decades.

[sabrina 1]

28. Yes, he is the number one suspect. He has fought everyone to try to

keep the negotiations that bailed out AIG secret, and to prevent the list of the banks who were the benficiaries of the 100% bailout, from becoming public.

Neil Barofsky, Elizabeth Warren, Bloomberg and many others have tried to get him to reveal the list as well as how it was decided to use TARP money to bail out AIG 100% when normally such bail-outs would be more like between 40% and 60%. By doing that they cost the tax-payers billions of dollars, and will not say who were the beneficiaries. I think Barofsky, the Special Investigator of the TARP funds, suspects that Golman Sachs was one of them.

People also want to know if former Bush appointee to the Fed, Freidman engaged in insider trading when he bought stocks in Goldman Sachs right before that questionable bailout was made public.

Barofsky is a tough in vestigator by all accounts and when asked recently if Geithner might be indicted he had no comment.

Elizabeth WArren questioned Geithner at length about the actions of the Fed in a recent hearing, but he dodged every question.

They have a lot to hide so Sanders is probably right, they do not want an audit and the question is 'what are they hiding'?

[BrklynLiberal]

3. DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Northerner]

4. Gee, I wonder why there might be opposition to auditing the Fed...

I do hope it passes nonetheless but it looks like it might be an uphill battle.

[ebbie15644]

5. Time to call

I called Casey and Specter and told them to support the amendment!!

[ebbie15644]

7. I doubt

He will veto the entire bill

[No Elephants]

19. I'll call out of habit, not bc I have hope that we are actually influencing our legislators.

If anything should have told us that, it was the so-called health care reform bill. 70% of all Americans, not Democrats, Americans, wanted a public option. Was one in the bill?

Voters went to sleep. I hope they wake up soon. It may already be too late, but I hope not. We have to shake our apathy and inertia fast, though.

Please see Reply # 23.

[Ter]

6. Even if it gets 60 votes, there's no way Obama doesn't veto this

n/t.

[robinblue]

15. That would be very telling indeed!

[high density]

8. Can he find 67 votes?

Unfortunately I can easily see Obama vetoing this.

[Jefferson23]

9. I love you Bernie! n/t

[biermeister]

10. www.auditthefed.com sign the petition! nt.

[Jefferson23]

16. Done and thanks. n/t

[No Elephants]

20. I'll sign, but not bc I believe internet petitions do squat. Please see Reply ##s 19 and 23.

[Jefferson23]

25. Kick for audit the fed. n/t

[jody]

11. A veto would betray those who work for their daily bread and enrich the corporatist puppet masters

who control our government.

[wildbilln864]

12. ******k&r! nt

[ShockediSay]

13. Maybe the future of our now so-called democracy, lies w/ the 3d party independents

forgetting Joe Lieberman, as I try to do every day

and I live in Connecticut

[No Elephants]

21. Don't think so. For the most part, Independents will vote either Pub or Dem.

Look at what Sanders says: the people who may stop his amendment are the same ones who have controlled Congress for decades. That means people who control Congress whether it is majority Dem or it is majority Pub. The money people.

[ShockediSay]

26. It's The Lobbyists nt

[boppers]

14. Text here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SP3738 :

Still allows permanent secret decisions, and 180 days of embargoing....

"Audits of the Federal Reserve Board and Federal reserve banks shall not include unreleased transcripts or minutes of meetings of the Board of Governors or of the Federal Open Market Committee. To the extent that an audit deals with individual market actions, records related to such actions shall only be released by the Comptroller General after 180 days have elapsed following the effective date of such actions."

[No Elephants]

22. IOW, even an amendment that is not as strong as it should be might not make it

through Congress and Obama.

Nothing new about that.

[Wilms]

18. k&r n/t

[No Elephants]

23. The U.S. has ceased being a democracy, for practical purposes. At some point, while we slept, it

MODs: In the source, the quote below is only 2 paragraphs total. I broke it up for readablity.
became a plutonomy.

Plutonomy:

"Economic growth that is powered and consumed by the wealthiest upper class of society.

Plutonomy refers to a society where the majority of the wealth is controlled by an ever-shrinking minority; as such, the economic growth of that society becomes dependent on the fortunes of that same wealthy minority

Investopedia explains Plutonomy
This buzz word was initially coined by analysts at Citigroup in 2005 to describe the incredible growth of the U.S. economy during that period despite increasing interest rates, commodity prices and an inflated national debt.

Citigroup analysts argued that as such an economy continues to grow in the face of contradictory elements, the more important the society's ultra rich become to maintaining such growth. The analysts also believed that in addition to the U.S., Canada, Great Britain and China are also becoming plutonomies."

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/plutonomy.asp


The 2006 Citigroup memo where the word plutonomy appeared for the first time--they had to invent a new word, because we had gone well beyond plutocracy by then--will curl your hair. If you have none, it will curl your scalp. Read 'em and weep.

If it's too hard to read, even with the virtual magnifying glass, you can find it on the net in pdf if you google.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674234/Citigroup-Oct-16-2005...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674229/Citigroup-Mar-5-2006-...

[sabrina 1]

30. Wow, I just read that. It is breath-taking in its arrogance

But it does prove that what many have suspected is not a conspiracy theory. Btw, one of the comments said that this memo appeared in the Michael Moore Doc. 'Capitalism, A Love Story'. I knew I would have to watch that move a few times as there was so much to absorb in it. I do remember references to CitiGroup though. An excellent movie for anyone who hasn't seen it.

There has been a slow, steady Corporate Coup D'etat in this country. I was surprised to see Canada mentioned as a 'plutocracy' also.

From the comment section:

We need a French Style Revolution... Where is my Guillotine?

I liked this comment, probably the only way to rescue the country since the current politicians are mostly owned and are a part of, as the memo says, what a Plutocracy requires, 'a cooperative government'/

Stunning to read that ~

[joe black]

24. Bernie for POTUS.

[Zorra]

27. And the argument against requiring this audit is...what, exactly?

Calling all Democratic Senators.

[laughingliberal]

29. No credible argument exists. nt