Isn't the Federal Reserve already audited?

[Matt Collins]

An e-mail from Campaign for Liberty today...





Dear Matt --

It’s one of the objections we most encounter when talking about Audit the Fed.

“The Fed’s already audited.”

Even the Fed itself claims it’s “subject to several levels of audit and review.”

So does that settle it? Open and shut case?

*Spoiler alert*

NO!

Last week, Dr. Paul emailed you with an Audit the Fed update and a link to several resources to help you spread the word and recruit more support for this historic effort.

One of those resources is an updated “Audit the Fed F.A.Q.” based on one that was created while I worked as Legislative Director in Dr. Paul’s congressional office.

And it directly tackles this “Fed’s already audited” talking point.

So to borrow from Paul Harvey, what’s the rest of the story?

Here’s what our F.A.Q. has to say:

2.) Isn’t the Fed already audited?
Not fully. The Fed’s financial statements are audited annually, but the Fed’s monetary policy operations are exempt from audit. Congress’ investigative arm, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), is currently prohibited by law from examining discount window and open market operations; agreements with foreign governments and central banks; and Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) directives. It is precisely this information that should be made public.

The American people must know how and why Fed officials expand the money supply and set interest rates. It is not enough for the Fed to simply provide its updated balance sheet after crucial decisions and transactions already have occurred. Audit the Fed allows the GAO to audit the Fed’s monetary policy operations and directs the GAO to report the audit results to Congress within a year of the bill’s passage.
And one more:

4.) Hasn’t the Fed already published details of its emergency bank lending?
Yes, but only partially. The Fed was required by the Dodd-Frank Act to disclose data from its emergency credit lending facilities created during the financial crisis. Most of the data on its other activities, such as open market operations and discount window lending, have only been published as a result of lawsuits – not because of Congressional action. Dodd-Frank requires this information to be disclosed going forward, but with a two-year time lag and with the GAO restricted to auditing only the procedural components of any programs. Audit the Fed grants the GAO and Congress access without special exemptions and ensures that ALL of the Fed’s lending actions will be subject to oversight.
C4L has even heard that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s staff has told callers that the Fed’s already audited, and that’s why the senator hasn’t brought up Audit the Fed for a vote.

But it’s clear Senator Reid doesn’t really have any excuse to not hold a Senate vote on a full Fed audit.

(And, if Senator Reid really does believe the Fed is already fully audited, it is odd he didn’t say that when asked about Audit the Fed in a campaign debate in 2010. Instead, candidate Reid said he supported Audit the Fed legislation, the very legislation his staff is now saying is unnecessary!)

You can help shatter myths about the Fed.

Click here to get our Audit the Fed F.A.Q., along with other resources including a half-page flier and a fact sheet (http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/23058173:22959018605:m:1:170731130:D832C34B71106BB 44D7C9EB69E849CB8:r).

And be sure to call your senators at 202-224-3121 today and urge them to push for a roll call vote on S. 209 or its House-passed counterpart, H.R. 24, during Congress’ upcoming Lame Duck session.

Thank you so much for helping Campaign for Liberty shine a spotlight on the Federal Reserve!

In Liberty,
http://www.chooseliberty.org/images/normsig1.jpg
Norm Singleton
Vice President of Policy

P.S. Can you chip in $5 or $10 to help C4L mobilize Americans on Audit the Fed and other core liberty issues?

If so, click here to donate today (http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/23058174:22959018605:m:1:170731130:D832C34B71106BB 44D7C9EB69E849CB8:r)!

[Zippyjuan]

Out of curiosity, how much money does the Fed have lent out through their Discount Window?

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DISCBORR


Discount Window Borrowings of Depository Institutions from the Federal Reserve

2014-09: 0.300 Billions of Dollars (+ see more)
Monthly, Not Seasonally Adjusted, DISCBORR, Updated: 2014-10-02 3:56 PM CDT

$300 million currently.

[Constitutional Paulicy]

Who cares? EBOLA is far too important to be concerned with these trivial matter. (sarcasm off) :(

[Chester Copperpot]

Out of curiosity, how much money does the Fed have lent out through their Discount Window?

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DISCBORR





$300 million currently.
More than they have backed up with gold.

[heavenlyboy34]

Collinz, I doubt anyone who hangs around RPFs is ignorant of how FED audits work or RP's End Teh FED endeavours.

[Zippyjuan]

More than they have backed up with gold.


The Fed doesn't own any gold so yes, that would be true. US gold is owned by the US Treasury and money isn't backed by gold anymore.

[devil21]

The Fed doesn't own any gold so yes, that would be true. US gold is owned by the US Treasury and money isn't backed by gold anymore.

What is the money backed by? What exactly gives the dollar value?

(nice post collins, i bit)

[Zippyjuan]

Everything- the entire US economy. It is backed by what you can exchange it for. You don't have to take it to the bank and trade it for some piece of metal. Its value is what people are willing to give it. If you agree to pay a certain amount for something, you have agreed to the value of the dollar for that transaction. If you agree to a certain wage at work, you are agreeing to the value of the dollars you are given in exchange for your labor.

[heavenlyboy34]

Everything. It is backed by what you can exchange it for. You don't have to take it to the bank and trade it for some piece of metal. Its value is what people are willing to give it. If you agree to pay a certain amount for something, you have agreed to the value of the dollar for that transaction. If you agree to a certain wage at work, you are agreeing to the value of the dollars you are given in exchange for your labor.

This^^ Value is subjective. Austrian Econ FTW.

[devil21]

Everything- the entire US economy. It is backed by what you can exchange it for. You don't have to take it to the bank and trade it for some piece of metal. Its value is what people are willing to give it. If you agree to pay a certain amount for something, you have agreed to the value of the dollar for that transaction. If you agree to a certain wage at work, you are agreeing to the value of the dollars you are given in exchange for your labor.

That's a long winded way to say that people's labor and energy backs the dollar, right? When the labor stops so does the value of the currency. Sound about right?

[Zippyjuan]

Basically- yes. Money is a medium of exchange. Its value is determined by the people who use it. Some think money should be a store of value. Why? Money can be exchanged for things you think might store value for you but nothing is guaranteed to store value. Not even gold. At one point in history, aluminum was more valuable than gold. Values are relative and change over time. Money itself does not have to serve that purpose.

[devil21]

Basically- yes. Money is a medium of exchange. Its value is determined by the people who use it.

Is gold money?

I think it's the people that create it with their labor, instead of those that codify the ability to create representations of it, that control the value of it. Most just don't understand this simple principle that was the standard prior to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The Fed Act gave a private corporation the power, unconstitutionally, to control the representations of American's labor. Don't you agree Zippy?

[Zippyjuan]

Is gold money?

Do you get paid in gold? Do you buy things with gold? If yes, then for you, gold is money. I don't use gold for money. You can trade money for gold if you like gold.

[devil21]

Cool. I like gold.

What are your thoughts on the second part of my post about labor and the dollar?

[Zippyjuan]

How does the Fed:

control the representations of American's labor

[devil21]

You tell me. Every dollar bill I have says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top of it. That is the 'money' and the Fed is a private bank. Yes or no question.

[Zippyjuan]

It is a hybred. It is not truely a private bank nor is it government run by Congress or the President. The president nominates members of the board and Congress has to approve of them but they don't get to tell the Fed what to do. The Fed has shares like a private bank but the shares cannot be bought or sold and have no voting rights- the share holders have no voice in what the Fed does. (Member banks must buy the shares equal to ten percent of their total assets to join the Federal Reserve system and have access to their services- more of a membership fee really than normal stock shares).

How do the words "Federal Reserve Note" impact labor which I thought was your question?

[devil21]

It is a hybred. It is not truely a private bank nor is it government run by Congress or the President.

So it's the financial equivalent of purgatory? That's kinda scary to hear regarding those that control the fiat currency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purgatory

It's hybrid btw. Or is it 'bred'?

[T.hill]

Is gold money?

I think it's the people that create it with their labor, instead of those that codify the ability to create representations of it, that control the value of it. Most just don't understand this simple principle that was the standard prior to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The Fed Act gave a private corporation the power, unconstitutionally, to control the representations of American's labor. Don't you agree Zippy?

Gold can be a money and like all monies it's direct use-value would come from it's exchange-value; that is the degree to which it is accepted as a means of transaction for more valued consumer goods. Value is subjective, it comes from the valuator not the thing being valuated. Money by it's nature as a social construct is a means to an end not really an end in itself and understand means only have value according to whatever end they help attain.

Anyway, the more relevant point is that gold does not have intrinsic value.

[Zippyjuan]

So it's the financial equivalent of purgatory? That's kinda scary to hear regarding those that control the fiat currency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purgatory

It's hybrid btw. Or is it 'bred'?

Thanks for the spelling correction. How would you like to see a monetary system structured? Who should be in charge- Congress or Bankers? This tries to keep both of them out of control.

[jmdrake]

Out of curiosity, how much money does the Fed have lent out through their Discount Window?

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DISCBORR



$300 million currently.

Nice misdirection. You are good. Very good. You left out the entire quote though.

Not fully. The Fed’s financial statements are audited annually, but the Fed’s monetary policy operations are exempt from audit. Congress’ investigative arm, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), is currently prohibited by law from examining discount window and open market operations; agreements with foreign governments and central banks; and Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) directives. It is precisely this information that should be made public.


How much has been lent to foreign banks? How about 1/2 trillion?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfPAnAllAFE

[heavenlyboy34]

Gold can be a money and like all monies it's direct use-value would come from it's exchange-value; that is the degree to which it is accepted as a means of transaction for more valued consumer goods. Value is subjective, it comes from the valuator not the thing being valuated. Money by it's nature as a social construct is a means to an end not really an end in itself and understand means only have value according to whatever end they help attain.

Anyway, the more relevant point is that gold does not have intrinsic value.

+rep :) Glad to see you get it.

[jmdrake]

Who cares? EBOLA is far too important to be concerned with these trivial matter. (sarcasm off) :(

+rep


Collinz, I doubt anyone who hangs around RPFs is ignorant of how FED audits work or RP's End Teh FED endeavours.

Ummmm....your point? Seriously. I know folks around here are reflexively "anti Collinz" and sometimes it's warranted but other times it's just plain silly. Ron Paul sent that email out because he wanted it read and distributed. This is more important than the latest "cop kills dog" or "pro/anti Ferguson riot" or "my religion is better than your religion" or "love/hate 9/11 truther" thread. Yes, all old timers know that there is this thing called the federal reserve that we are supposed to be against. But does everyone understand how to argue that point to the rest of America? Zippy, for all his trolling ways, actually added something worthwhile to the discussion.

[jmdrake]

Thanks for the spelling correction. How would you like to see a monetary system structured? Who should be in charge- Congress or Bankers? This tries to keep both of them out of control.

Nice false choice fallacy.

[Ronin Truth]

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=Federal+Reserve+audit&gbv=2&oq=Federal+Reserve+audit&gs_l=heirloom-hp.13..0l7.67240750.67248890.0.67263562.21.3.0.0.0 .0.3953.4672.6-1j9-1.2.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..19.2.4672.grizOLrFdck

[presence]

Thanks for the spelling correction. How would you like to see a monetary system structured? Who should be in charge- Congress or Bankers? This tries to keep both of them out of control.

Money should represent MASS of tangible commodities held in full reserve. Neither the congress or bankers should be "in charge". Anyone could issue, the freemarket would handle value, and the courts would handle fraud.

[Ronin Truth]

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." -- Henry Ford

[acptulsa]

The Fed doesn't own any gold so yes, that would be true. US gold is owned by the US Treasury and money isn't backed by gold anymore.

So why is Ft. Knox empty and the basement of the New York Fed full?


Thanks for the spelling correction. How would you like to see a monetary system structured? Who should be in charge- Congress or Bankers? This tries to keep both of them out of control.

Ah, yes. The myth that the huge banks that own all the shares in the Fed have no say in what it does.

Keep shilling it. If you keep repeating a lie long enough some will indeed think it true. Of course, it takes a bit longer if the lie makes not one lick of sense...

[Ronin Truth]

What is the money backed by? What exactly gives the dollar value?

(nice post collins, i bit)

In the case of the FRNs, debt backs the currency. The dead give away clue is in the name, Federal Reserve NOTE. As debts are repaid the money supply shrinks. Hence the major deflation worry and Fed mega-fear.

Evil genius, no?

[Zippyjuan]

So why is Ft. Knox empty and the basement of the New York Fed full?



Ah, yes. The myth that the huge banks that own all the shares in the Fed have no say in what it does.

Keep shilling it. If you keep repeating a lie long enough some will indeed think it true. Of course, it takes a bit longer if the lie makes not one lick of sense...

Link to proof of no gold in Fort Knox? Yes, you are right that the Fed does store gold in their vaults-for not just the US Treasury but some foreign governments as well- but they don't own any of it.

[Zippyjuan]

Money should represent MASS of tangible commodities held in full reserve. Neither the congress or bankers should be "in charge". Anyone could issue, the freemarket would handle value, and the courts would handle fraud.

The free market does determine the value of money. The Fed doesn't set any prices or wages.

[acptulsa]

Link to proof of no gold in Fort Knox?

Can't link to him and won't name him. Enough soldiers have done duty there, however, that many people actually here in the U.S. have the inside scoop.


Yes, you are right that the Fed does store gold in their vaults-for not just the US Treasury but some foreign governments as well- but they don't own any of it.

Possession has ceased to be nine tenths of the law? When push comes to shove, we shall see.


The free market does determine the value of money. The Fed doesn't set any prices or wages.

But they do have a legislated monopoly on that 'market', don't they? So you are arguing that a legislated monopoly a 'free market' makes?

[Madison320]

Everything- the entire US economy. It is backed by what you can exchange it for. You don't have to take it to the bank and trade it for some piece of metal. Its value is what people are willing to give it. If you agree to pay a certain amount for something, you have agreed to the value of the dollar for that transaction. If you agree to a certain wage at work, you are agreeing to the value of the dollars you are given in exchange for your labor.

I've heard this bogus argument before that the dollar is backed by the US economy. No it's not. You can't go to the bank and redeem your dollars for a certain % of the economy, "Here's 20 dollars, I'd like 3 shares of the US economy, please".

[Zippyjuan]

You don't have to go to the bank to do it. You can trade dollars for a piece of the economy everywhere. Every time you buy something with dollars you are purchasing a piece of the economy. Or if you want a literal share, you can exchange them for stocks or bonds. Why should you be limited to only exchanging money at a bank for something?

[Madison320]

You don't have to go to the bank to do it. You can trade dollars for a piece of the economy everywhere. Every time you buy something with dollars you are purchasing a piece of the economy. Or if you want a literal share, you can exchange them for stocks or bonds. Why should you be limited to only exchanging money at a bank for something?

Yes, I can trade dollars for a piece of the economy, but it's not "backed" by the economy. There's nothing in writing that says your dollar can be legally exchanged for a certain percentage of the economy.

[acptulsa]

You don't have to go to the bank to do it. You can trade dollars for a piece of the economy everywhere. Every time you buy something with dollars you are purchasing a piece of the economy. Or if you want a literal share, you can exchange them for stocks or bonds. Why should you be limited to only exchanging money at a bank for something?

What the hell are you babbling about?

If I buy something newly produced, I suppose I'm trading a piece of the GDP--which I earned--for another piece of the GDP. But if I were paid in old silver coins for contributing a piece of the GDP, and trade them for another, then I've purchased as much of the GDP and no FRNs were involved. And if I don't need to purchase anything today, when I do spend those old silver coins they will buy about as much. So, my contribution to the GDP is still there for me. If I leave a FRN in my pocket a while, that portion of the GDP which I contributed and was paid for mysteriously evaporates.

That's the only 'magic' specific to the Fed's Monopoly Money. And it doesn't work its magic in my favor.

[pcosmar]

Or is it 'bred'?

It is bred. The banks are fucking the people.

[Ronin Truth]

"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks." -- Lord Acton (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/quotes/authors/l/lord_acton.html)

[Zippyjuan]

What the hell are you babbling about?

If I buy something newly produced, I suppose I'm trading a piece of the GDP--which I earned--for another piece of the GDP. But if I were paid in old silver coins for contributing a piece of the GDP, and trade them for another, then I've purchased as much of the GDP and no FRNs were involved. And if I don't need to purchase anything today, when I do spend those old silver coins they will buy about as much. So, my contribution to the GDP is still there for me. If I leave a FRN in my pocket a while, that portion of the GDP which I contributed and was paid for mysteriously evaporates.

That's the only 'magic' specific to the Fed's Monopoly Money. And it doesn't work its magic in my favor.

Trading silver for goods is barter. But silver is also a piece of the economy. It has to be mined and refined and minted into coins. That is economic activity. Trading FRNs for silver is getting a piece of the economy as well.


If I leave a FRN in my pocket a while, that portion of the GDP which I contributed and was paid for mysteriously evaporates.

Should all prices stay the same forever so you can always get the exact same thing for the exact same amount of money? What about supply and demand for goods which changes over time?