iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

White House Explains Opposition To Fed Audit Amendment, No Veto Threat

First Posted: 07/06/10 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 05:25 PM ET

Obama Bernanke

The Obama administration offered to date its most direct opposition to an amendment to Wall Street reform legislation that would allow for an audit of the Federal Reserve, though administration officials declined to say whether the president would veto a bill that included the proposal.

In a briefing on Thursday, Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin expressed concern that the amendment, authored by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), would damage the independence of the Fed -- either in perception or practice. The administration has pushed a side amendment that Wolin said would accomplish the goals of Sander's proposal but would not bring politics into monetary policy.

"We oppose the Sanders amendment in its current form," Wolin said. "Transparency of Fed is critically important... But we also think it is important that the Federal Reserve board have independence. We think that countries that have had... the perception of political influence in their central banks have had real problems."

Would the president veto a bill that included the amendment? "We are continuing to work with Senator Sanders, Senator [Chris] Dodd (D-CT) and others to make sure we can accomplish these twin objectives," Wolin replied. "We will move forward in those discussions before we get to discussions about vetoes."

Over the past few weeks and months, Sanders has done yeoman work lining up support behind his proposal. He had been in regular contact with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel about the issue before learning on Thursday (via the New York Times) that the White House has pushed an alternate amendment as a means of killing his one.

On Thursday, nevertheless, the senator received a major endorsement in the form of explicit backing from Majority Leader Harry Reid. As for the White House's concerns, the senator has stressed repeatedly that he is not interested in politicizing central banking, merely getting a clear sense about where the $2 trillion in low-interest loans paid by the Fed actually went since the recession began.

Asked about this pushback, Wolin again insisted that the White House supports the spirit of the provision but not the legislative language. He said the administration also wants to know who received bailout funds. But, he added, "we think that is an incredibly important principle... what we want to make sure at the same time is that the provision doesn't in an unintended way get into the area of monetary policy that encroaches on the central bank's independence."

Sander's amendment, he concluded, "take[s] down some barriers that have existed for some time now... with the respect of GAO not getting into the middle of monetary policy. That's the kind of thing we are worried about."

UPDATE: Huffington Post's Ryan Grim reports that Sanders has agreed to a compromise on his amendment that would essentially affirm that the audit would not touch the Fed's monetary policies. The agreement won the backing of Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.). And in a statement on Thursday afternoon, Wolin indicated the White House would support it too.

We appreciate the work of Senator Sanders and Senator Dodd to work together on a strong amendment that ensures full and open transparency regarding emergency lending programs, without compromising the Federal Reserve's full independence with respect to the conduct of monetary policy.

Senator Sanders' revised amendment provides for a comprehensive GAO audit of the Federal Reserve Board's operations in response to the recent financial crisis, while preserving the existing protections of the Federal Reserve's independence with respect to monetary policy.

We are confident that the revised amendment proposed by Senator Sanders strikes the appropriate balance: providing full transparency of lending programs while protecting the bedrock principle of central bank independence on monetary policy that has served our nation so well.


FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
 
 
  • Comments
  • 111
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
Estreet1964
Gimmie the beat boys and free my soul....
05:59 PM on 05/06/2010
They're worried about political influence of the Fed?

Jeebuz, the freaking Ayn Rand groupies have been running the place for decades!

AUDIT THE FED NOW!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hysterian68
bureaucrat/historian/ranter
05:47 PM on 05/06/2010
Where is the amendment to AUDIT everything in the FED and then abolish the FED altogether.?

If we don't, Bernanke is going to be bailing out the banks with EURO investments, lending money to the Greeks, and then using taxpayer funds to bail out Portugual, Spain, and ultimately the Germans.

We cannot afford to have the Federal Reserve a ticking time bomb in the hands of Bernanke and Obama. Otherwise, it isn't some Pakistani leaving his car in Times Square we'll have to worry about, it is the millions of Americans--including teabaggers-- who will be throwing Molitov cocktails on Capitol Hill.
05:28 PM on 05/06/2010
The White House once again is on the wrong side of an important issue.
I honestly cannot fathom who is guiding them on this path to oblivion. Obama is doing his level best to follow in Jimmy Carter's footsteps and become yet another one termer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hysterian68
bureaucrat/historian/ranter
05:48 PM on 05/06/2010
I think Obama has already decided he won't be seeking another term. He's on a suicide mission, politically speaking, now.
photo
KingGeorgetheTurd
GOP, Fact Free since 1981!
06:09 PM on 05/06/2010
lol, both of you are in such delusionalland. After Obama's 2nd term is over, there is going to be an outcry for a 3rd term amendment.

I'd bet my life on it.
05:26 PM on 05/06/2010
It is ridiculous to argue the Fed, with both regulatory and monetary policy authority, remain "independent". (And by "independent" they mean unaccountable.) If the Fed insists on maintaining its supervisory authority, then we should expect it to have the same openness and oversight as we strive for other regulatory agencies. The argument for "independence" of any public authority brings up critical issues of governance and democracy. The reason we strive for openness and oversight of regulatory agencies is to prevent conflict of interest, malfeasance, and incompetence; the Fed easily has demonstrated all three over the last few years. In my opinion, the Fed should be publicly censured, regularly publicly audited by the other branches, and stripped of all but its monetary function.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
profoundimagery
Human Being - Born Savannah GA. Raised in South Br
05:37 PM on 05/07/2010
Fanned Big Time! Hope you don't mind if I cut and paste on Digg, Buzz, Facebook, in conversation etc. because I'm doing that now.
05:23 PM on 05/06/2010
Since 1913 the Federal Reserve has been running a Keynesian policy for the rich to ensure a good return on their money. They have done this through the creation of short-lived debt leveraged bubbles for the rich to gamble on. They have also controlled wages through NAIRU. Not only should the FED be audited it should be taken out of the hands of the private banking cartel and returned to political accountability. This might allow the stop-go bubble economy to become a thing of the past.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Audi
05:21 PM on 05/06/2010
PRESIDENT OBAMA, MR. BERNANKE - BY ORDER OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WE TELL YOU TO TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marie Russell-Barker
Grandmother, Greatgrandmother.
05:12 PM on 05/06/2010
I don't understand money matters, very well, but from what I just read the President don't want to get into the banking money matters, makes very little since most business have independent audits, why are the banks different. An audit do not necessary mean it have to be about money matters it can be about how they run their business end of the bank.

It have been my thoughts that banks should not be in the Mortgage businesses, I think that only mortgage companies should be in the mortgaging business and they should know how the real estate part is runes Big Banks that got into the mortgage business are directly the cause of the failure of the housing marketing and foreclosures of to day. Banks looks at the bottom line and they are greedy they set up a scram of giving people home loans with tricky names and most did not understand or was unqualified to have those types of loans.

I agree with the ideal that these Big Banks that have their hands into every aspect of loans, should be broken up and down sized.
11:04 PM on 05/06/2010
The Fed and other so-called "international bankers" play a con game with the public's money that is well described and documented in G. Edward Griffin's book "The Creature from Jekyll Island". If you want to understand the insidious, devious nature of the Fed in a broader, historical context that's a good place to start. You'll rapidly understand why it should be audited (at a minimum) and eliminated -- and why such measures will be so adamantly opposed by people you (thought you) trusted.

You'll also understand why Ron Paul, Alan Grayson and others that oppose the Fed are truly brave men. Highly recommended.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:11 PM on 05/06/2010
Let me see if I understand this right. The Fed isn't really the people's bank, but the banker's bank. The board should be free of political influence, "cough, cough, smirk, cough" to the bankers can continue to do what they have always done at the public's expense.

Please show me where I am wrong.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hysterian68
bureaucrat/historian/ranter
05:50 PM on 05/06/2010
So, if the banks are defunct or have been nationalized or seized, what role does the Fed continue to have. It's reason for being has vanished. CAPUT.
photo
Hobsonschoice
Relentlessly curious...
05:08 PM on 05/06/2010
OK, I'm confused. Are some readers forming their impressions on this topic by reading only the headline or the first paragraph of this article? Reading on, one would find that:

"We oppose the Sanders amendment in its current form," Wolin said. "Transparency of Fed is critically important... But we also think it is important that the Federal Reserve board have independence. We think that countries that have had... the perception of political influence in their central banks have had real problems."

Or could it be that the fact that HuffPost chose to include an ellipsis rather than print Woldin's entire statement, leading to confusion as to the administration's position? Not only is there a missing word or two from the middle of the statement, as shown by the ellipsis, but an entire portion of the statement has disappeared, and no mention of that editing appears in the text of this story.

Here is the last sentence of the above quote, as printed in the WSJ:

"We think that countries that have had either the reality or the perception of political influence in their central banks have had real problems, problems with respect to inflation, with respect to the cost and availability of credit including to consumers and to small businesses."

HuffPost editors should indicate when a direct quote has been truncated... It's kind of a basic rule in Journalism 101 that quotations be exact, or if altered, that the alteration be acknowledged.
05:02 PM on 05/06/2010
God help this WH if it vetoes a Fed audit, but of course they oppose it. It means Geithner and Bernacke must go.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:05 PM on 05/06/2010
Ds and Rs will RUE THE DAY they opposed this amendment.
05:10 PM on 05/06/2010
And if they do, you have to ask yourself, what choice are we left with?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hysterian68
bureaucrat/historian/ranter
05:53 PM on 05/06/2010
Obama is giving the GOP a political opening: to OUTDO the Democrats as the party of banking reform. If they're too stupid to take up the challenge and grab the opportunity, the GOP will seal it's fate in the fall. Obama will have deserved to whup them and whup them good in November and in 2012.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FWDpost
05:02 PM on 05/06/2010
The Fed is a stooge of the IMF, and the bankers and elite run the IMF.
Look at the "reform" ordered by IMF and bankers for Greece. Raise everyone's retirement age immediately. Cut some pensions immediately by thousand or more per month. Raise VAT by 4% to 23% (it's a national sales tax, promoted here by Paul Ryan and the Rubin/Summers club.)
If we don't stop these leeches, they will suck the blood of the middle class.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ConnectedTraveler
imithe as an saol seo ach i mo chroĂ­ go deo
04:59 PM on 05/06/2010
Lets see political influence over our sovereign money supply is bad but 100% control of our money supply by banks that own the Fed is okay right?
04:56 PM on 05/06/2010
An Audit of the Fed is good business. We the People gave them authority, but they are not a federal department... they are the original outsource. Audit them!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:56 PM on 05/06/2010
i trust sanders. i have lost faith in obama.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:59 PM on 05/06/2010
me too. the value of our money is at stake. we need to take back our monetary policy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:19 PM on 05/06/2010
fanned ! i have rendered unto ceaser, and now i want to see what the f he did with it!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hysterian68
bureaucrat/historian/ranter
05:57 PM on 05/06/2010
If Sanders, Kaufman, Whitehouse, Brown, and others supporting genuine reform measures and heavy regulation of the banks lose, it will split the Democratic Party and Obama will have a host of challengers to deal in his bid to be renominated in 2012.

The ones to watch are Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Bernie Sanders, Russ Feingold from Wisconsin. They are waiting and they are watching.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:55 PM on 05/06/2010
Independence of the Fed is a myth.

the Fed has over a TRILLION in MBSs on books.

and bernanke is developing money making tools as we speak.

so tell me How is the FED really an independent regulator? when it has vested interests in the markets?

independence from the government only means it doesn't want the people looking over its shoulder at its business transactions...

the FED is out of control, and quite possibly has exceeded its mandate.

AUDIT THE FED
05:03 PM on 05/06/2010
quite possibly? The understatement of the year!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Hysterian68
bureaucrat/historian/ranter
06:00 PM on 05/06/2010
Bernanke has thrown all pretensions of Fed independence and political neutrality to the four winds. He's deteriorated into little more than a silly GS-14 civil servant desperately trying to save his turf, his pay grade, and the brass plaque on his desk.

Time for Bernanke to GO and to abolish the Federal Reserve altogether.