Audit the Fed: Rand Paul + Elizabeth Warren?

[economics102]

I can't stand Elizabeth Warren but I'm wondering if we're likely to see the two of them team up on an Audit the Fed push in the senate. I don't get the impression Warren has much sway with her colleagues though.

[anaconda]

Discount window this time around?

[Valli6]

(Reposting my comment about Warren from another thread http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...nking-examiner ):
.......................................

More hearings?! PFFFT!

Warren Calls for Hearings on New York Fed Allegations
By Matthew Boesler and Kathleen Hunter Sep 27, 2014 12:00 AM ET

U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren called for congressional hearings into allegations that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York has been too deferential to the firms it regulates.

A radio program about the regional Fed bank raised “disturbing issues” and “it’s our job to make sure our financial regulators are doing their jobs,” Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Senate Banking Committee, said in a statement yesterday….

…Senator Sherrod Brown, an Ohio Democrat who’s also on the banking committee, backed Warren’s call for a probe.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0...#disqus_thread

Excerpts from Forbes Magazine, by Perianne Boring, 11/29/2013:

…In the middle of this hallway huddle of cameramen and reporters I stood less than 3 feet away from Sen. Warren, with only a microphone in between us. I asked her what she thought of Senator Rand Paul’s calls to filibuster Janet Yellen’s nomination unless his bill to audit the Fed was brought to the floor for a vote. She said “this is not the right use of the filibuster. His problem is not with Janet Yellen and her policies generally. He wants a protest to stop the process of considering people going forward.”…

After avoiding the subject of auditing the Fed by calling Sen. Paul disingenuous, I asked Sen. Warren if she believes the Fed’s books should be audited. She looked me right in the eye and then moved on to the next person. I’ll take that as a “No.”

Prior to joining the Senate, Elizabeth Warren served as the Assistant to the President and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). This agency was created under the Dodd-Frank financial reform law and unlike most agencies, is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Reserve. Opening up the Fed’s books would mean opening up the CFPB’s books. Warren played an integral role in the CFPB’s inception, and when asked if these agencies should be transparent, she chose not to respond. As someone who has championed reforms and transparency within our financial institutions, she should be outspoken about holding her own agency to these same standards.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/perianne...uls-fed-audit/

.......................................

This does, however, give Rand Paul a chance to call her out on her hypocrisy!

[WD-NY]

(Reposting my comment about Warren from another thread http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...nking-examiner ):
.......................................

More hearings?! PFFFT!



Excerpts from Forbes Magazine, by Perianne Boring, 11/29/2013:

.......................................

This does, however, give Rand Paul a chance to call her out on her hypocrisy!

Yep! And all of her fanatic fans on reddit and other prog forums. Best of all, you don't even need to call anyone out or get in a debate - just simply repost the quote and link to the forbes article you posted and watch them twist themselves into knots trying to excuse/explain lol

[TaftFan]

She supports the Ex-Im Bank, so I don't know.

[philipped]

I DONT CARE ABOUT A HEARING. TELL HARRY REID TO PUT S.209 TO A VOTE!

[CaptUSA]

The only way this gets to a vote in the Senate is if they can be assured that enough Senators will vote against it. Being a contentious election issue, you can bet that that won't happen. This will not come up for a vote.

[georgiaboy]

The only way this gets to a vote in the Senate is if they can be assured that enough Senators will vote against it. Being a contentious election issue, you can bet that that won't happen. This will not come up for a vote.

I agree it won't come up for a vote, but more due to politics as usual - Reid just being the party-line blocker.

I don't see this as a contentious election issue, even if voted up or down. Seems much more inside baseball.

Is it showing up in debates, ads, talking points, etc.? Just doesn't seem like something that would sway voters in this climate, or generally be talked up by candidates on either side.

[CaptUSA]

I agree it won't come up for a vote, but more due to politics as usual - Reid just being the party-line blocker.

I don't see this as a contentious election issue, even if voted up or down. Seems much more inside baseball.

Is it showing up in debates, ads, talking points, etc.? Just doesn't seem like something that would sway voters in this climate, or generally be talked up by candidates on either side.

Yeah, I get what you're saying.

I just find it to be one of those easy "establishment vs. anti-establishment" votes. When the climate is such that being an "insider" is a bad thing, this could hurt some people if they voted against it. It opens up an area of attack for a challenger.

[economics102]

The only way this gets to a vote in the Senate is if they can be assured that enough Senators will vote against it. This will not come up for a vote.

Funny, isn't this the reverse of how Congress is supposed to operate?