• 

House Financial Services Committee approved Ron Paul “Audit the Fed” * House Attacks Fed * Call for Geithner to Quit *

Critical Vote on Audit the Fed!

Congressman Paul will offer an amendment in Committee restoring an audit of the Fed’s entire $2 trillion balance sheet, but we have received word that some of the Democrat members may be waffling on their support for his amendment.

For example, Watt’s amendment prevents the GAO from auditing or reviewing decisions to authorize, modify, extend, or terminate loans or liquidity facilities.

Fed balance sheet can be audited, panel says

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) – A key congressional committee approved legislation on Thursday that would allow for government audits of Federal Reserve monetary policy as well as how much the central bank has lent and will lend to specific banks in response to the financial crisis, despite major opposition from the central bank. The measure, introduced by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, has the support of 309 members of Congress.

House Attacks Fed, Treasury

Panel Votes for Tighter Political Rein on Central Bank; Some Call for Geithner to Quit

WASHINGTON — Political frustration over the rescue of Wall Street and high unemployment erupted in Congress Thursday, with one committee threatening to impose tighter scrutiny on the Federal Reserve and another excoriating Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

The House Financial Services Committee voted, 43-26, to approve a measure sponsored by Texas Republican Ron Paul, vociferously opposed by the Fed, that would direct the congressional Government Accountability Office to expand its audits of the Fed to include decisions about interest rates and lending to individual banks. The Fed says the provision threatens its ability to make monetary policy without political interference.

Treasury chief Geithner faced a House Republican who told him, ‘The public has lost all confidence in your ability to do the job.’ He shot back: ‘What I can’t take responsibility is for the legacy of crises you’ve bequeathed this country.’

The vote was the latest blow to the central bank, which has been become a lightning rod for politicians responding to popular anger that Wall Street was bailed out while the public was not. The Fed faces a stinging backlash from legislators from both parties who argue that has too much power and too little oversight. On Thursday, the Senate Banking Committee began debating legislation that would largely remove the Fed from bank supervision over the objections of both the Fed and the Obama administration.

The Paul-Grayson Amendment
by Ron Paul and Alan Grayson

“It is encouraging to see the issue of Federal Reserve transparency receiving so much attention during this current markup. Today we plan to offer an amendment to the Financial Stability Improvement Act that expands on the many extant proposals to enhance Federal Reserve transparency. Our amendment is based on HR 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, which has broad bipartisan and grassroots support. The bill is cosponsored by 309 Members of Congress, including all Financial Services Committee Republicans and 13 Financial Services Committee Democrats.

The amendment removes restrictions on GAO audits of the Federal Reserve, as HR 1207 does, but makes a few changes to take into account some of the concerns that the Fed has made known in public testimony.

Unlike proposals that target the Fed’s 13(3) facilities, the Paul/Grayson amendment opens up the entire $2 trillion Federal Reserve balance sheet to a GAO audit.

Mr. bernanke, do THEY have OUR gold? or did THEY sell it to Europeans for $35/oz within years of being CONFISCATED from the American people at $25/oz after THEY bankrupted us in 1933?

Learn more about the corrupt “Federal Reserve System”:
http://americanbuilt.us/videos/federal-reserve-system.shtml

• 

• 

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced this week that it would be policing blogs and social media for the first time, cracking down on “reviewers” and advertisers who fail to provide full disclosure in endorsements, sparking intense outrage among the regulated. Violators can be subject to $11,000 fines per infraction.



”Given that social media has become such a significant player in the advertising area, we thought it was necessary to address social media as well,” explained the FTC’s assistant director of advertising practices Richard Cleland, describing the agency’s first overhaul of its endorsement policies in almost 30 years. The proposal was adopted with the unanimous approval of all four commissioners.



More than 80 pages of confusing new rules will now govern bloggers’ and even social media users’ activity. If they are paid to write an endorsement, or even if they receive an item for free and then write about it, everything must be noted “clearly and conspicuously.” There are also provisions mandating that people disclose any “material ties.”



When companies give a reviewer a product to write about, they “should have procedures in place to try to monitor his postings for compliance,” explains an example provided in the FTC rules. How should people know whether the FTC will consider something an endorsement? According to the regulations: “The facts and circumstances that will determine the answer to this question are extremely varied and cannot be fully enumerated here …”

Source: JBS.org

• 

• 

Treasury Dept. Admits Mega-Billion Dollar Global Warming Tax

Documents obtained this week from the U.S. Treasury Department reveal the Obama administration’s plans for a massive global-warming tax through “cap and trade” legislation that has already passed the House. The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) requested the Treasury documents (PDF) under the Freedom of Information Act and was given an edited version of five records that indicated the cost to American taxpayers would be from $100 – $200 billion per year.

This is just an estimate, since the Treasury had blacked out the end of the following sentence: “It will raise energy prices and impose annual costs on the order of….” Opponents of the plan maintain that the average household would end up saddled with an estimated one to two thousand dollars in added energy consumption costs annually, costs that are corroborated by the Treasury’s estimate since there were 105,480,101 households as of the last census.

If passed, cap-and-trade legislation would set up government rationing of industrial carbon dioxide emissions. Obama’s plan involves granting, selling, and/or auctioning carbon dioxide-emission permits to the industrial sector, which will translate to higher prices for household and business energy consumers.

“The cost of a cap-and-trade plan to businesses and consumers will be huge, which the Treasury Department internally acknowledges,” said CEI Senior Fellow Christopher Horner. “The documents represent what the administration expects ‘cap and trade’ to cost, and raise. It’s a candid perspective that must be told with as much openness to the American public as administration staff discuss with each other. Therefore, we call on the Administration to immediately release complete, un-redacted copies of these documents for all to see. No more hiding.”

Environmentalists disagree with CEI’s conclusions, claiming that Obama plans to use cap-and-trade revenue to cut taxes. Tony Kreindler, spokesman for the Environmental Defense Fund, explained, “That math ignores the redistribution of revenue back to consumers. It only looks at one side of the balance sheet. It would only be true if you think the administration was going to pile all the cash on the White House lawn and set it on fire.”

The Treasury Department goes even further. “The reporting on the Treasury analysis is flat out wrong,” said Alan B. Krueger, Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy. “The reporting and blogging on this issue ignores the fact that the revenue raised from emission permits would be returned to consumers under both administration and legislative proposals.”

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are not convinced. “The current administration claims to be the most transparent in American history, yet it’s been hiding a report showing its cap-and-trade energy plan would cost up to $200 billion every year,” argued Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.). “American families can’t afford a new $1,761 yearly energy tax, and our economy surely cannot afford the 1-percent drop in productivity this big-government bill would cause. The best step we can take right now to lower energy costs, boost the economy, and clean our air would be to rely on a technology we created: nuclear power.”

Others warn this legislation would likely offshore more American jobs, since countries like China and India do not levy greenhouse-gas taxes. In a February interview with the New York Times, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said, “The concern about cap-and-trade in today’s economic climate is that a lot of money might flow to developing countries in a way that might not be completely politically sellable.”

Source: The New American

• 

• 

Powerful House Financial Services Committee chairman says central bank’s lending powers to be ‘curtailed’

Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA), one of the most unabashed liberals in the U.S. House of Representatives, told a Massachusetts town hall recently that Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul’s bill to audit the Federal Reserve will clear his chamber by October.

Over half of the House members, most of them Republican, have signed on to the bill, H.R. 1207.
Though Frank disagrees — as many proponents of the bill contend — that the Fed is the cause of the U.S. dollar’s shrinking value, he told a Massachusetts audience that he’s been a proponent of greater transparency at the nation’s central bank for some time.

“Here’s what we plan to do: I want to restrict the powers of the Federal Reserve in a number of ways,” he said. “First of all, they will be the major losers of power if we’re successful, as I believe we will be, setting up that, uh, financial product protection committee.”

The committee Frank mentioned was proposed by President Barack Obama during the campaign, as a way of protecting consumers. It was formally presented to Congress in the President’s financial regulatory reform white papers in July, noted law firm Wiley Rein LLP.

“The Federal Reserve is now charged with protecting consumers,” continued Frank. “They were supposed to do sub-prime mortgage restricted … Congress in 1994 gave the Federal Reserve the power to adopt rules to ban bad sub-prime mortgages. … They have the power to ban credit card abuses. They have the power to do most of it. They, under Greenspan, did nothing.

“Under Bernanke, they started to do things, but only after Congress started, when I became chairman of the [House Financial Services Committee], we began to act on these things: Sub-prime mortgages, credit cards, overdraft … And after we started, the Fed did. So, that’s why one of the reasons why in the new consumer protection agency we will take away from the Federal Reserve the power to do consumer protection.”

Frank added that Congress will reverse an action by the Democratic Congress of 1932 that gives the Fed authority to lend money at will.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/rep-frank-house-will-pass-ron-paul’s-‘audit-the-fed’-bill-this-year.html

• 

• 

The assault on Liberty is in full force, and it has lead to a discovery unheard of; and proves the point that the Gov’t will be controlling our health decisions from the privacy of our own homes. 

It was discovered by Chuck Norris (who kicks ass by the way!) and it would allow Gov’t health officials into your home to make health decisions for you and your family.

From Town Hall:

It’s outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading “home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children.” The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.

The bill says that the government agents, “well-trained and competent staff,” would “provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains … modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices,” and “skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development.”

Here is a link to the actual text of the bill. Scroll down and look for headline about home visitations.

http://www.conservativeforchange.com/2009/08/govt-health-officials-will-be-allowed.html

• 

• 

Dr. Ron Paul, health freedom’s friend in Congress, introduced two important bills yesterday that, if passed, would rein in the excessive interference in advanced health products by the FDA and FTC.

You can support these bills here:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27732

Here is the Life Extension Foundation’s description of the bills:

HR 3395: The Health Freedom Act. This bill removes FDA’s power of prior restraint over all nutrient-disease relationship claims. Under the bill, the FDA may not prohibit any statement concerning a nutrient affecting a disease (including treatment effects) from being made in the market and may only act against a statement once made if it possesses clear and convincing evidence that the statement is false. Presently the FDA blocks an enormous quantity of truthful information concerning the effects of nutrients and foods on disease from reaching consumers. That barrier is removed by the Health Freedom Act, but the Act preserves the power of the government to prosecute those who communicate falsehood. The essential purpose of the First Amendment is to disarm the federal government of the power to impose a prior restraint on speech. The FDA has imposed a prior restraint for decades to the health detriment of the public. Passage of the Health Freedom Act will restore constitutional governance by reasserting the supremacy of the First Amendment over the Food and Drug Administration.

HR 3394: The Health Information Protection Act. This bill prevents the Federal Trade Commission from taking action against any advertiser that communicates a health benefit for a product unless the FTC first establishes based on clear and convincing evidence that the statement made is false and that its communication causes harm to the public. Presently, the FTC reverses the Fifth Amendment burden of proof on the government when it charges advertisers with deceptive advertising and then demands that they prove their speech true based on contemporaneously held documentation or be deemed to have advertised deceptively. The Fifth Amendment requires that FTC bear the burden of proving advertising deceptive. It may not constitutionally shift the burden to the advertiser to prove its statements not deceptive. The First Amendment requires that FTC not act against speech unless the speech is probably false. It may not constitutionally accuse a party of false advertising yet lack proof that the advertising is false and condemn advertising based on an absence of documentation concerning the truth of the statement rather than the presence of evidence establishing the falsity of the statement.

These bills go to the heart of the issue of valid health claims for nutrient products: how do companies substantiate the claims they are making. Essentially the bills apply Constitutional principles to the making of claims, which are a type of speech, and are therefore protected from excessive bureaurcratic burden.

In this context it is useful to see what then Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote for the Supreme Court majority in the leading health claim free speech case, Thompson v. Western States Medical Center – 01-344, decided on April 29, 2002 – 535 U.S. 357 -

“If the First Amendment means anything, it means that regulating speech must be a last – not first – resort.”

“We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making bad decisions with the information.”

“Even if the Government did argue that it had an interest in preventing misleading advertisements, this interest could be satisfied by the far less restrictive alternative of requiring each …to be labeled with a warning that the [product] had not undergone FDA testing and that its risks were unknown.”

The basic rule, announced by the case, to determine constitutionally permitted government restrictions on Commercial Speech (speech that makes or is about an offer for a transaction) is a Two Prong Test: the first prong is to ask two questions: (1) is the speech in question about unlawful activity and (2) is the speech misleading. If “no” to both, the speech is entitled to protection unless the Government can carry its burden and prove (1) the governmental interest involved is “substantial”, (2) the regulation must “directly advance” the governmental interest and (3) the regulation of Commercial Speech cannot be “more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest” (quoting Central Hudson v Public Service, 447 US 557, at 566).

Dr. Paul’ s bills make it clear that the government has the burden of proof if it seeks to restrict what marketers say about their health related products. In this way, his bills preserve the Constitutional protections for Commercial Speech.

You can support these bills here:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27732

This entry was posted on Saturday, August 1st, 2009 at 10:00 am and is filed under Dietary Supplements,Divest Governement of Food Regulation, Food Crisis, Get Involved, Legislation to Support, Privacy,Promising Developments . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

• 

• 

Congress recently passed Obama’s war funding billH.R. 2346 Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009, which according to GOP.gov is a $105.8 billion spending bill.  RawStory.com quoted Ron Paul, who stated the bill includes a $108 billion asset exchange with the International Monetary Fund.

GOP.gov confirms the actual amount:

Last week, Democrats in the House and Senate came to a conference agreement on the final language for the Conference Report. The agreement provides billions in non-defense funding, including $108 billion to expand the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) loan programs, which was not included in the House bill. The $108 billion was agreed to by the President in April when he and other members of the G-20 created a plan to increase IMF supplemental funding by tenfold and broaden the role of the Fund.

We can only assume the $108 billion is separate from the $105.8 billion.  The $108 IMF funding is described as a buy back, or loan guarantee.

According to Thomas.gov the IMF funds are to help Pakistan, although the IMF has come under fire as being the actual cause of global poverty by both Progressive–like Senator Bernie Sanders who voted to strip the IMF funding–and Republicans such as Ron Paul.

Republican Jim DeMint tried to strip out the IMF funding in the Senate bill by introducing Amendment 1138:

The DeMint amendment failed although Robert Bennett voted for the amendment.  Orrin Hatch did not vote.  There were 30 nays and 64 yeas.

sources for more information:

Senate Vote On Passage: H.R. 2346: Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009

House Vote on Conference Report: H.R. 2346: Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009

Information on how to contact your elected officials

There are several reports stating the policies in NAFTA that devastated Mexico where championed by the World Bank and IMF:

Press release: World Bank and IMF share in blame for Mexico’s crisis: From the 50 Years Campaign on Mexico Crisis 6 January, 1995

How the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Undermine Democracy and Erode Human Rights:Five Case Studies

John Perkins author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, has done a number of interviews where he claims the money being loaned out by the IMF and World Bank is used for infrastructure projects that go to companies like Halliburton, Halliburton’s subsidiary KBR, and Bechtel.  The ruling elite in the country take a cut for accepting the offer, and then the citizens of the country are left holding the debt.

Progressive John Pilger has made 35 documentaries from 1970 to 2006.  His films have been distributed in the UK, Australia and Canada, but have not been released in the US.  Pilger’s 2006 documentary The New Rulers of the World takes a look at the effect the World Bank and IMF had on Indonesia.

John Pilger’s documentary War by other Means examines the World Bank.

• 

• 

US President Barack Obama has signed into law a $106 billion bill in a bid to quell militancy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The original bill put forward by Obama included 80 million dollars for the closure of the infamous Guantanamo Bay prison camp in addition to 108 billion dollars in government credit to provide the International Monetary Fund with funds to help reverse the global economic downturn.

His military budget plan, however, was scaled down after the US Congress opposed Obama’s unelaborated version of the spending scheme.

In its approved form, the bill allows around 80 billion dollars of the projected defense expenses to be allocated to the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the summer season.

The bill, signed into law on Wednesday, also includes a $7.7 billion measure to fight the spread of swine flu throughout the globe as well as $5 billion in fresh credits for the IMF despite fierce Republican opposition to the expenses.

Obama’s financial plan for the US military also provides $1 billion as an incentive for car buyers who trade inefficient vehicles for more efficient ones.

The funding is meant to jolt the depressed US automobile market.

The bill has been secured following weeks of militancy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

• 

• 

Washington, D.C. – Congressman Ron Paul’s Federal Reserve Transparency Act, HR 1207, has reached and surpassed the level of 218 cosponsors in the House of Representatives, which means it is now cosponsored by a majority of the members.

The 218th cosponsor was Dennis Kucinich (OH-10), and the bill has since received its 242nd cosponsor.

“The tremendous grass-roots and bipartisan support in Congress for HR 1207 is an indicator of how mainstream America is fed up with Fed secrecy,” said Congressman Paul. “I look forward to this issue receiving greater public exposure.”

Hearings on Federal Reserve transparency are expected within the next month, as part of the Financial Services Committee’s series of hearings on regulatory reform.

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/tx14_paul/audit.shtml

•