This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley Breaks Party Rank, Lays Out The Case Against Bernanke
Too bad the dissident democrat was unable to convince more of his colleagues in the validity of his vision. The Oregon Democrat summarizies the contra case most succinctly:
"Dr. Bernanke is a dedicated and honorable public servant...however those factors in my mind do not outweigh my concerns on regulation and rebuilding the economy... Dr. Bernanke's approach helped set our economic house on fire. That fire has destroyed the jobs, the healthcare, the retirement savings, of millions of American working families. Since then Dr. Bernanke has shown himself to be quite adroit with the fire hose, helping to put that fire out. But as we look to the future, and we look beyond the stage of putting the fire out, I think we need to look to leadership that will be adept at rebuilding our economic house."
We hope that the Senatoral vote will see more party line breaks, in which case we urge other democrats to follow in Sen. Merkley's footsteps. This is further reinforced by prevailing popular opinion among the American people, of whom only 21% favor the Chairman's reappointment.
»
- 2896 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I can be proud of my Senator Jeff Merkeley. He also sent me this response in regard to a Fed Audit:
"Thank you for contacting me about reforming the governance of the Federal Reserve. It is an honor to serve as your Senator, and I appreciate hearing from you.
The Federal Reserve has taken extraordinary actions to stabilize our financial system. In doing so, it has departed significantly from its traditional relationship with markets and has taken on unprecedented new risks. Because of these recent Fed activities, I recently introduced the Federal Reserve Accountability Act (S. 1803) with Senator Bob Corker (R-TN). This legislation would subject the Federal Reserve's new emergency lending activities to a robust financial audit by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). As you may know, the GAO already has audit authority to investigate all aspects of the Federal Reserve's operations, with the exception of monetary policy. However, my legislation makes clear that bailout programs are not monetary policy and should not be shielded from GAO oversight.
Transparency and accountability are fundamental principles of representative government, and my legislation would strike the right balance in maintaining oversight of Federal Reserve activities without disturbing its traditional independence over monetary policy. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Senate Banking Committee to address this issue and other needed reforms to our financial industry. Thank you, again, for sharing your thoughts with me. I hope you will continue to keep me informed about the issues that matter most to you."
I'm an Oregonian as well. Haven't been sure what to make/expect of Merkeley, but he's definitely getting this one right.
I believe Bernanke has already welcomed this type of audit, as did former chairmen Greenspan and Volcker in a recent letter to congress.
Well he may not rise to the level of Grayson... or Paul... but he seems to 'get' the bigger picture... and is willing to go where most Democrats are afraid to go...
Really the fact that we had 70% of the Senators in favor of his confirmation in contrast to the 21% of public support should truly be the lead story in each of the states that these senators belong to. I'd be curious to see exactly how much they are leveraging the bonuses and kickbacks received in comparison to what their constituents ask.
Seriously, why are there no senate term limits? I think that's as important as lobbyist restrictions.
Where do you think the legislation for term limits would have to come from?
Most of the problems this country faces could be faced, viewed objectively, and then solved with term limits.
But then what good has it done with the Executive Branch?
Never mind.
+1
Term limits would be a start, I'd prefer dropping them completely.
You are very correct on the term limits and the lobbiests. We need to take the money equation out off the election process. Term limits will also ensure these entrenched crooks are there for a cup of coffee only. To the other respondant, we need to vote for people that stand for term limits as there main platform or they will not get the vote.
Well with term limits, you force the good out with the bad.
If we took the example of the presidency and FDR, he would have been out in 1940, and although you can't say what would have happened, one thing is clear, whoever else would have been in office, would have made much poorer decisions.
I agree with the goals that terms limits brings, I just believe there is a better way to skin the cat, and let it live.
Additionally if everyone can only be there 1-2 terms, then there is no incentive to make good decisions. You're in, you're out, you become a lobbyist. You're a lame duck before you know it. I don't think we want at any given time 1/3 the congress as lame ducks.
Also in what capacity, 1-2 terms for a senator is far longer than 1-2 terms in the house.
If you want to control the lobbyists, then control the lobbyists. You need not radically alter the system, in an attempt to, and with low correlation to the overall problem. The problem is the money. Money + Lobbyists. Pass legislation on those.
I'm sure you could get the congress to ban lobbyists (throw them under the bus) far quicker and realistically than getting congress to agree to term limits against itself . Not only is it the right thing to do, it's highly correlated with another important factor involving our congress, saving their own skin!
Plus when you consider 'we the people' put them in power, denying a particular populace the right to vote for it's preferred candidate is a law that strips too much power from its citizens. I think
If one feels that the populace is making a mistake it all comes down to education. If we are too stupid to govern, we should realize that, and take steps to remedy it.
Term limits will only push more power to the money. Term limits will not stop the money, it'll just make it 'appear' that it's less involved. It's a partial solution that merely hides the symptom of the problem, it does not DIRECTLY address the real problem of money and corporate influence on our politicians.
I'm going to believe a rookie congressman isn't going to get rolled by these guys? When they make up 1/3 the congress? Just look at some of our younger congressman. They're apprehensive as hell. Some will fight, but the fact is, most defer until they get some legislation and experience under their belt before they open their wings.
The way I see it, it's kind of like a college football team cutting all it's juniors and seniors and just playing with freshman and sophmores. It might work against San Diego State (if you're lucky), but good luck beat Ohio State, Texas, etc.
Focus on the issues and pass legislation directly causing the problems. No more dancing around the sidelines on issues that may make a dent. Go right after it. No lobbyists. No campaign contributions from corporations (money isn't free speech). You'll have to get a supreme court overrule on that last part. But, what must be done, must be done. You all know we can get creative here in deny power and money access to congress. Term limits won't achieve such goals, it will only make it worse. Go after the REAL reason. If anything, that's what our congress lacks the most. The ability to go after the REAL problems, or more specifically the crux of the issues.
f one feels that the populace is making a mistake it all comes down to education. If we are too stupid to govern, we should realize that, and take steps to remedy it.
Yes you are correct, most people are stupid. They vote along party (blured) lines. My point was 2 fold on taking the bribery money out of the political process and limiting the crooks to a set term. This would also need to be correrleted with the terms a senator vs. a house rep servers.
I really appricate your response as you know what needs to be done before its to late.
I am not a tea bagger, nor a dem or a repub. I see the game being played. As you day, money is the root.
Are you actually currently in Congress? This is the 'their' party line. Ohhh...experience is so important in governing. I call BS. Experience is important in KNOWING HOW TO SCAM THE PUBLIC.
While I am at it, this statement is ridiculous:
If you "can't say what would have happened", how is it "clear" that the next president would have made poorer decisions. Short of FINALLY getting off his ass (ooppss. sorry!) and joining the rest of the world fighting evil, he didn't really make many good decisions. So why would I believe you that the next president would have been worse??
Bernanke was the administration's pick- because he is a holdover from the Bush era- if shit doesn't go their way on the economy- then all fingers (from the administration) can point at Bernanke-
not a bold choice- but from a political standpoint- the safest choice
Precisely! My vote (holding my nose) for Bush's second term was because I wanted him to be there when TSHTF. No other reason. My low-level logic can be applied at any level.
Yep, just some more of that change we can believe in. How long before OB starts passing out those Presidential Medals of Freedom to Ben, Larry, and Timmy?
Senator Merkley's comments remind me of an old definition of an Auditor - someone who comes in after the battle has been fought and shoots the wounded.
"tricks and traps"
PROPS to Sen. Merkley
oh, and ya think Sen. Dodd looked a little upset with Merkley?
Senator Merkley's comments remind me of the old definition of an Auditor - someone who comes in after the battle has been fought and shoots the wounded.
I certainly appreciate Sen. Merkley's courage to speak his mind and his vote against Bernanke. I wish I had the time to do this subject justice right now, but I don't. I promise to, soon. But what I will say, right now, is that Ben Bernanke is NOT an honorable public servant. Yes, his approach did help set the economic house on fire, but there are a lot different views about fiscal policy, the role of the Fed, etc. What makes Bernanke a real scoundrel, though, unfit to be re-nominated, is that ever since the house starting burning, he has been lying and lying and lying at every opportunity. He's lied about what he knew and when he knew it. He has lied about his beliefs. He has lied about what he and others have done and he's lied about why they have done it.
Which probably qualifies him for a seat in the Senate. But that's a different story. The point is, there's a whole lot of truth that has been obliterated on a regular basis since the crisis began and Ben Bernanke was a point man in that effort. That is precisely why Obama re-nominated him. There's a construct of lies that has to be maintained, now. The Senate Finance Committee is fully aware of that cause they, too, have been full of it and have made the decision to remain full of it for the forseeable future. We have to disabuse them of the comfortable feeling that zero accountability for bs is here to stay.
Agreed. How do you propose we let Senators and Congressman know thatcwe know that they know Bernanke is a lying sack of dreck ?. Who has that kind of access other than the msm or the connected ?.
I say stab them in the throat with the butter knife while they are enjoying prime rib at Mortons... Berlusconi them ... Apologies to Marla.
Nikki. Revoltuion calling you...
I'll look forward to your expanded version of the comment.
It is apparent that Mr. Bernanke does not want to be seen as being wrong. He has a tendency to blame other persons or circumstances for the problems.
Look at his replies to Bunning:
http://bunning.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileSto...
Short of the questions that did not get a straight answer at all are the answers that point the blame at someone/thing else.
He's like the child who is obviously lying about the broken vase. Everyone can see it plainly. The child just goes more and more entrenched with every word. Pretty soon he believes his own story. Really sad.
I wonder if Ben is going to get some ribbing from the gang in the locker room with that "quite adroit with the fire hose" comment.
Bern baby Bern--financial inferno
"We hope that the Senatoral vote will see more party line breaks, in which case we urge other democrats to follow in Sen. Merkley's footsteps."
and perhaps some of the nice Republican Senators who voted to confirm Bernanke will also have a change of heart - this is not a Dem Repub issue but one of bankster control of the executive and legislative branches of Government regardless of party affiliation - just ask Judd Gregg (R- New Hampshire) who appeared to be either drunk or half asleep at today's hearings - (NOTE the portion of this clip where he compares the Gold Standard to a Soya Bean standard)
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/ID/217024&start=5161&end=6258
Is it just me or is his version of 1800's history a little off?
Judd Gregg is a fascist scumball.
Nice job Chuck Schumer.
Bernanke and the banks screw up big time. and drive us into the crapper.
They are doing it again, with the same policies but on steroids now!
You are giving them a reward for their failure. You are supporting the SAME people doing the SAME thing. They have thrown trillions and it is not fixed and likely getting worse. And you support this...
You are a wall street shill Schumer and you have no stones.
Senator Merkley's comments remind me of the old definition of an auditor - someone who comes in after the battle has been fought and shoots the wounded.
You guys are missing the big picture.
Reappointing The Beard is an insurance policy against political backlash on the next leg down.
They are setting him up now so they can throw him under the bus if/when things hit the fan.
That's why Obama nominated him and that's why the Dems support a Republican (in addition to his fine printing skills)
It would be very hard to throw Bernanke under the bus. He can't be fired on a whim.
Whats worse a brown nose or a red ass...either way its embarrassing
Thank you Sen. Merkley. I would only say that it is a misuse of the title of "Dr." when preceding "Bernanke".
What do Volcker, Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner and Larry Summers all have in common? Answer that question and you've found the root of the problem.
That's why we call him Bernokio.