Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)
HR 1207 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1207
To amend title 31, United States Code, to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 26, 2009
Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. KAGEN, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. JONES, Mr. REHBERG, Mr. POSEY, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, and Ms. WOOLSEY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services
A BILL
To amend title 31, United States Code, to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009'.
SEC. 2. AUDIT REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY FOR THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.
(a) In General- Subsection (b) of section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking all after `shall audit an agency' and inserting a period.
(b) Audit- Section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
`(e) Audit and Report of the Federal Reserve System-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks under subsection (b) shall be completed before the end of 2010.
`(2) REPORT-
`(A) REQUIRED- A report on the audit referred to in paragraph (1) shall be submitted by the Comptroller General to the Congress before the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which such audit is completed and made available to the Speaker of the House, the majority and minority leaders of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the committee and each subcommittee of jurisdiction in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and any other Member of Congress who requests it.
`(B) CONTENTS- The report under subparagraph (A) shall include a detailed description of the findings and conclusion of the Comptroller General with respect to the audit that is the subject of the report, together with such recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Comptroller General may determine to be appropriate.'.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Tea Party
Lincoln County Republicans! 
Come to the Tax Day Tea Party in Augusta at the Capitol Park (right across the street from the State Capitol) at 5:30 pm, tomorrow, Wednesday, April 15th.
A group of Constitutionalists and taxpayers from Lincoln County will be on site. Visit their blog HERE!
This is a non-partisan protest against the tax-and-spend politics of federal, state and local governments!
Friday, April 10, 2009
Ronald Reagan Speech - 1964 Republican National Convention
This speech is just as true and just as important as it was back in 1964. It makes me aware again, that the problems this country faces, are nothing new. Just new faces to the same old leftist, totalitarian ideology! We are in an ongoing fight of Good vs. Evil! And we will PREVAIL!
Thanks to Dave H. for sending this in!
Thursday, April 9, 2009
GOP Refuses to Learn from History - AGAIN!
The Lincoln County GOP meeting yesterday in New Harbor was interesting, to say the least. 
Charlie Webster, leader of the Maine Republican Party and, obvious representative of the general thinking of Party officials, presented his vision of how to win Maine back for the GOP.
What he was basically saying was that the future of the Republicans lies in getting Republicans into office. Now, while that may SEEM self evident (for any RINO), he also said very clearly, that the GOP has to pander to the constituents of their individual districts. He said:“In a district up north, that’s really conservative, we have to run with a conservative. In a district with lots of liberal voters, we have to run with a moderate candidate”.
While that might seem straight out of Machiavelli or the playbook of coca cola marketing, he then went on to make the HUGE, the ENORMOUS mistake, that I have seen being made in Europe’s conservative parties over the past 4 decades. Charlie Webster said: “… and once we HAVE a majority in the Senate and the House, then the entire GOP will return to real conservatism.”
THAT is not going to happen, because politics like that end up to be self serving power politics devoid of any philosophical or political meaning.
There is a saying, that he who refuses to learn from history’s mistakes is bound to repeat them. Nothing could be more true or more relevant in this context.
We only have to look at the history of the European christian-democrat parties to see, where this GOP is going. Social democracy and socialism in Europe have been pandering to the unproductive part of society, to illegal immigrants and social parasites and self-victimizing minorities ever since the end of the 1960s, promising them a big, free piece of the national cake in return for votes. As corporate and individual taxes in Europe are generally at double the level they are in the US, all European countries could afford massive social programs and “free” healthcare for everybody. (Un)fortunately, it turned out, that these programs were not sustainable because businesses and productive individuals were taxed to death and leaving the country for greener (tax)-pastures.
The part of this development that is relevant in our context here is, that the conservative parties jumped on that bandwagon of “spreading the wealth around”. They simply noticed, that if they wanted to stand even the slightest chance of winning ANY elections, they would have to start coddling the social parasites with promises of money, government programs, and official victim hood status. So they did! The effect was, that the European conservative parties are only conservative in name. When you look at their programs and actions and listen to their speeches, it becomes evident, that they are pure social-democrats and socialists. This has been going on and getting worse for four decades now!
Only now are there political developments, in Austria for instance, where REAL conservatives have formed new rightist, conservative parties that bring home 30% of the vote regularly. That is a LOT in a multi-party system. More interesting even than that figure is the fact, that these parties have over 50% in the 18 to 35 year old segment of the population. Something that this present GOP can only dream about!
If the GOP were smart, they’d study the history of the European conservatives. Instead, they insist that, as long as the label on the politician says “GOP”, “we the people” have to fold and shut up.
THAT is not going to happen!
Charlie Webster, leader of the Maine Republican Party and, obvious representative of the general thinking of Party officials, presented his vision of how to win Maine back for the GOP. 
What he was basically saying was that the future of the Republicans lies in getting Republicans into office. Now, while that may SEEM self evident (for any RINO), he also said very clearly, that the GOP has to pander to the constituents of their individual districts. He said:“In a district up north, that’s really conservative, we have to run with a conservative. In a district with lots of liberal voters, we have to run with a moderate candidate”.
While that might seem straight out of Machiavelli or the playbook of coca cola marketing, he then went on to make the HUGE, the ENORMOUS mistake, that I have seen being made in Europe’s conservative parties over the past 4 decades. Charlie Webster said: “… and once we HAVE a majority in the Senate and the House, then the entire GOP will return to real conservatism.”
THAT is not going to happen, because politics like that end up to be self serving power politics devoid of any philosophical or political meaning.
There is a saying, that he who refuses to learn from history’s mistakes is bound to repeat them. Nothing could be more true or more relevant in this context.
We only have to look at the history of the European christian-democrat parties to see, where this GOP is going. Social democracy and socialism in Europe have been pandering to the unproductive part of society, to illegal immigrants and social parasites and self-victimizing minorities ever since the end of the 1960s, promising them a big, free piece of the national cake in return for votes. As corporate and individual taxes in Europe are generally at double the level they are in the US, all European countries could afford massive social programs and “free” healthcare for everybody. (Un)fortunately, it turned out, that these programs were not sustainable because businesses and productive individuals were taxed to death and leaving the country for greener (tax)-pastures.
The part of this development that is relevant in our context here is, that the conservative parties jumped on that bandwagon of “spreading the wealth around”. They simply noticed, that if they wanted to stand even the slightest chance of winning ANY elections, they would have to start coddling the social parasites with promises of money, government programs, and official victim hood status. So they did! The effect was, that the European conservative parties are only conservative in name. When you look at their programs and actions and listen to their speeches, it becomes evident, that they are pure social-democrats and socialists. This has been going on and getting worse for four decades now!
Only now are there political developments, in Austria for instance, where REAL conservatives have formed new rightist, conservative parties that bring home 30% of the vote regularly. That is a LOT in a multi-party system. More interesting even than that figure is the fact, that these parties have over 50% in the 18 to 35 year old segment of the population. Something that this present GOP can only dream about!
If the GOP were smart, they’d study the history of the European conservatives. Instead, they insist that, as long as the label on the politician says “GOP”, “we the people” have to fold and shut up.
THAT is not going to happen!
Monday, April 6, 2009
Drastic Federal Intervention in Freedom of Expression on the Internet
VERY interesting bill that our Senator Olympia Snowe co-sponsors here:
By Drew Zahn© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A pair of bills introduced in the U.S. Senate would grant the White House sweeping new powers to access private online data, regulate the cybersecurity industry and even shut down Internet traffic during a declared "cyber emergency."
Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., are both part of what's being called the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, which would create a new Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor, reportable directly to the president and charged with defending the country from cyber attack.
A working draft of the legislation obtained by an Internet privacy group also spells out plans to grant the Secretary of Commerce access to all privately owned information networks deemed to be critical to the nation's infrastructure "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access."Who might be watching you without you knowing it? Get "Spychips" and see how major corporations and government are planning to track your every move!Privacy advocates and Internet experts have been quick to sound the alarm over the act's broadly drawn government powers."The cybersecurity threat is real," says Leslie Harris, president of the Center for Democracy and Technology, which obtained the draft of S.773, "but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy.""The whole thing smells bad to me," writes Larry Seltzer in eWeek, an Internet and print news source on technology issues. "I don't like the chances of the government improving this situation by taking it over generally, and I definitely don't like the idea of politicizing this authority by putting it in the direct control of the president."
According to a Senate document explaining the bill, the legislation "addresses our country's unacceptable vulnerability to massive cyber crime, global cyber espionage and cyber attacks that could cripple our critical infrastructure."In a statement explaining the bill's introduction, Sen. Rockefeller said, "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs – from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records – the list goes on."
Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, who is co-sponsoring the bill, added, "If we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina."Critics, however, have pointed to three actions Rockefeller and Snowe propose that may violate both privacy concerns and even constitutional bounds:
First, the White House, through the national cybersecurity advisor, shall have the authority to disconnect "critical infrastructure" networks from the Internet – including private citizens' banks and health records, if Rockefeller's examples are accurate – if they are found to be at risk of cyber attack. The working copy of the bill, however, does not define what constitutes a cybersecurity emergency, and apparently leaves the question to the discretion of the president.
Second, the bill establishes the Department of Commerce as "the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information," including the monitoring of private information networks deemed a part of the "critical infrastructure."
Third, the legislation proposes implementation of a professional licensing program for certifying who can serve as a cybersecurity professional.And while the critics concede the need for increased security, they object to what is perceived as a dangerous and intrusive expansion of government power."There are some problems that we face which need the weight of government behind them," writes Seltzer in eWeek. "This is not the same as creating a new federal bureaucracy setting rules over what computer security has to be and who can do it.""It's an incredibly broad authority,"
CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim told the Mother Jones news website, troubled that existing privacy laws "could fall to this authority."Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Mother Jones the bill is "contrary to what the Constitution promises us."According to Granick, granting the Department of Commerce oversight of the "critical" networks, such as banking records, would grant the government access to potentially incriminating information obtained without cause or warrant, a violation of the Constitution's prohibition against unlawful search and seizure."What are the critical infrastructure networks? The examples provided are 'banking, utilities, air/rail/auto traffic control, telecommunications.' Let's think about this," writes Seltzer. "I'm especially curious as to how you take the telecommunications networks off of the Internet when they are, in large part, what the Internet is comprised of. And if my bank were taken offline, I would think about going into my branch and asking for all of my deposits in cash."S. 778, which would establish the Office of the National Security Advisor, and S. 773, which provides for developing a cadre of governmental cybersecurity specialists and procedures, have both been read twice and referred to committee in the Senate.
By Drew Zahn© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A pair of bills introduced in the U.S. Senate would grant the White House sweeping new powers to access private online data, regulate the cybersecurity industry and even shut down Internet traffic during a declared "cyber emergency."
Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., are both part of what's being called the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, which would create a new Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor, reportable directly to the president and charged with defending the country from cyber attack.
A working draft of the legislation obtained by an Internet privacy group also spells out plans to grant the Secretary of Commerce access to all privately owned information networks deemed to be critical to the nation's infrastructure "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access."Who might be watching you without you knowing it? Get "Spychips" and see how major corporations and government are planning to track your every move!Privacy advocates and Internet experts have been quick to sound the alarm over the act's broadly drawn government powers."The cybersecurity threat is real," says Leslie Harris, president of the Center for Democracy and Technology, which obtained the draft of S.773, "but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy.""The whole thing smells bad to me," writes Larry Seltzer in eWeek, an Internet and print news source on technology issues. "I don't like the chances of the government improving this situation by taking it over generally, and I definitely don't like the idea of politicizing this authority by putting it in the direct control of the president."
According to a Senate document explaining the bill, the legislation "addresses our country's unacceptable vulnerability to massive cyber crime, global cyber espionage and cyber attacks that could cripple our critical infrastructure."In a statement explaining the bill's introduction, Sen. Rockefeller said, "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs – from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records – the list goes on."
Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, who is co-sponsoring the bill, added, "If we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina."Critics, however, have pointed to three actions Rockefeller and Snowe propose that may violate both privacy concerns and even constitutional bounds:
First, the White House, through the national cybersecurity advisor, shall have the authority to disconnect "critical infrastructure" networks from the Internet – including private citizens' banks and health records, if Rockefeller's examples are accurate – if they are found to be at risk of cyber attack. The working copy of the bill, however, does not define what constitutes a cybersecurity emergency, and apparently leaves the question to the discretion of the president.
Second, the bill establishes the Department of Commerce as "the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information," including the monitoring of private information networks deemed a part of the "critical infrastructure."
Third, the legislation proposes implementation of a professional licensing program for certifying who can serve as a cybersecurity professional.And while the critics concede the need for increased security, they object to what is perceived as a dangerous and intrusive expansion of government power."There are some problems that we face which need the weight of government behind them," writes Seltzer in eWeek. "This is not the same as creating a new federal bureaucracy setting rules over what computer security has to be and who can do it.""It's an incredibly broad authority,"
CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim told the Mother Jones news website, troubled that existing privacy laws "could fall to this authority."Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Mother Jones the bill is "contrary to what the Constitution promises us."According to Granick, granting the Department of Commerce oversight of the "critical" networks, such as banking records, would grant the government access to potentially incriminating information obtained without cause or warrant, a violation of the Constitution's prohibition against unlawful search and seizure."What are the critical infrastructure networks? The examples provided are 'banking, utilities, air/rail/auto traffic control, telecommunications.' Let's think about this," writes Seltzer. "I'm especially curious as to how you take the telecommunications networks off of the Internet when they are, in large part, what the Internet is comprised of. And if my bank were taken offline, I would think about going into my branch and asking for all of my deposits in cash."S. 778, which would establish the Office of the National Security Advisor, and S. 773, which provides for developing a cadre of governmental cybersecurity specialists and procedures, have both been read twice and referred to committee in the Senate.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Olympia Snowe and The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was started in the 20s by big money people; Morgan's, Rockefeller's, and so on.
This is a non-partisan, invitation only, totalitarian socialist group whose main objective is "One World Government".
The CFR was responsible for creating the Federal Reserve, starting the Great Depression, getting us into World War II, starting the United Nations, putting communists in power in China, not letting us win the Korean War, the list goes on and on.
These "big money" people are not interested in competetive free markets, quite the contrary, their focus is power and control; they are monoplists, as are socialist and communist form of government, which they favour.
They have never let go on their quest for "One World Government" and are very close to fulfilling their objectives.
Members of this non publisised group include:
George Soros
Rupert Murdoch
Michael Bloomberg
Bill Clinton
Madeline Albright
John McCain
Fred Thompson
Timothy Geithner
Alan Greenspan
Olympia Snowe
Tom Brockaw
It is no wonder that Olympia Snowe voted for the "Stimulus" spending bill, for the "Obama Youth" civil national security vote,
for confirmation of fellow CFR member and tax cheat Timothy Geithner.
Olympia Snowe votes for her own agenda, that of the CFR and does not represent Maine or what Maine needs and wants.
I urge everyone to get "The Shadows of Power - The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline" by James Perloff,
a student at Colby College and Boston University during the latter years of the Vietnam War. and a contributor to The New American and
the John Birch Society's biweekly journal of news analyis and opinion.
This is a non-partisan, invitation only, totalitarian socialist group whose main objective is "One World Government".
The CFR was responsible for creating the Federal Reserve, starting the Great Depression, getting us into World War II, starting the United Nations, putting communists in power in China, not letting us win the Korean War, the list goes on and on.
These "big money" people are not interested in competetive free markets, quite the contrary, their focus is power and control; they are monoplists, as are socialist and communist form of government, which they favour.
They have never let go on their quest for "One World Government" and are very close to fulfilling their objectives.
Members of this non publisised group include:
George Soros
Rupert Murdoch
Michael Bloomberg
Bill Clinton
Madeline Albright
John McCain
Fred Thompson
Timothy Geithner
Alan Greenspan
Olympia Snowe
Tom Brockaw
It is no wonder that Olympia Snowe voted for the "Stimulus" spending bill, for the "Obama Youth" civil national security vote,
for confirmation of fellow CFR member and tax cheat Timothy Geithner.
Olympia Snowe votes for her own agenda, that of the CFR and does not represent Maine or what Maine needs and wants.
I urge everyone to get "The Shadows of Power - The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline" by James Perloff,
a student at Colby College and Boston University during the latter years of the Vietnam War. and a contributor to The New American and
the John Birch Society's biweekly journal of news analyis and opinion.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
The Strategy of the International Banker
It is no secret that the international bankers profiteer from sovereign state debt.
The New York banks have found important profit centers in the lending to countries plunged into debt by Socialist regimes. Under socialist regimes, countries go deeper and deeper into debt because socialism as an economic system does not work. International bankers are sophisticated enough to understand this phenomenon and they are sophisticated enough to profit from it.
Because the public debt is sovereign debt, the bankers have calculated that they will always be able to collect. If there is too much risk in the private debt side, it is a simple matter to get Socialist governments to nationalize banks, private enterprises, and agricultural holdings. In this way, private debt is converted to sovereign debt which the bankers have believed will always be collectable.
The New York banks find the profit from the interest on this sovereign debt to be critical to their balance sheets. Up until very recently, this has been an essentially riskless game for the banks because the IMF and World Bank have stood ready to bail the banks out with our taxpayer money.
Senator Jesse Helms - 1987
The New York banks have found important profit centers in the lending to countries plunged into debt by Socialist regimes. Under socialist regimes, countries go deeper and deeper into debt because socialism as an economic system does not work. International bankers are sophisticated enough to understand this phenomenon and they are sophisticated enough to profit from it.
Because the public debt is sovereign debt, the bankers have calculated that they will always be able to collect. If there is too much risk in the private debt side, it is a simple matter to get Socialist governments to nationalize banks, private enterprises, and agricultural holdings. In this way, private debt is converted to sovereign debt which the bankers have believed will always be collectable.
The New York banks find the profit from the interest on this sovereign debt to be critical to their balance sheets. Up until very recently, this has been an essentially riskless game for the banks because the IMF and World Bank have stood ready to bail the banks out with our taxpayer money.
Senator Jesse Helms - 1987
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)