Conquer Club

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

saxitoxin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

OK TGD you move me halfway to yes ...

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

OK TGD you move me halfway to yes ...

Isn't "halfway to yes" also defined as "maybe?"

saxitoxin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

OK TGD you move me to yes. Scott edit the poll so we can change our votezers.

Woodruff wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

OK TGD you move me to yes. Scott edit the poll so we can change our votezers.

He'll be changing the wording to "Should the Federal Reserve be eliminated?", but he needs to wait for more people to vote first.

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

OK TGD you move me to yes. Scott edit the poll so we can change our votezers.

He'll be changing the wording to "Should the Federal Reserve be eliminated?", but he needs to wait for more people to vote first.

He's allowing folks to change their votes.

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

OK TGD you move me to yes. Scott edit the poll so we can change our votezers.

He'll be changing the wording to "Should the Federal Reserve be eliminated?", but he needs to wait for more people to vote first.

He's allowing folks to change their votes.

Phatscotty wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:I voted "maybe" because, according to the Federal Reserve, they're already audited. So I'd need to hear a clear explanation of why these audits aren't sufficient and who would conduct the new audit before I changed my vote to yes or no.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

I ran my mouse cursor over all of the links and it appears all of the audits are from web pages ending in ".gov."

I suppose Coca Cola could audit themselves... oh wait, no that's illegal.

OK TGD you move me to yes. Scott edit the poll so we can change our votezers.

He'll be changing the wording to "Should the Federal Reserve be eliminated?", but he needs to wait for more people to vote first.

He's allowing folks to change their votes.

Isn't he just trolling?

thegreekdog wrote:Please stop. Thanks.

saxitoxin wrote:For the record, I've already offered an alternative to the Federal Reserve. (see: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=171987)

Maugena wrote:Damn you, Saxi, I can't get ice cream at 12:30 am!

saxitoxin wrote:

Maugena wrote:Damn you, Saxi, I can't get ice cream at 12:30 am!

Where do you live, here?

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul tells Newsmax.TV that “the Federal Reserve needs oversight” and expects a full vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on legislation that would grant congressional oversight of the independent central bank.

“We need to have checks and balances,” the first-term Republican told Newsmax. “They are an agency that, basically, has destroyed 96 percent of the value of our currency over the last 100 years or so.

“We need to do something to have congressional oversight over what they do.”

On Wednesday, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted unanimously to authorize an investigation of the Fed to make it more accountable to lawmakers.

The measure was sponsored by Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul, a longtime Fed critic — and Rand’s father.

Sen. Paul introduced similar legislation in January 2011.

“I think it will pass the full House,” Rand Paul said of measure’s future prospects. He’s hoping for a vote this summer.

“There are many who don’t want to have a vote because they fear that a vote will pass. … We just have to get a vote.”

In the Senate, Paul said he’s “doing everything I can possibly do to get a vote. But over in the Senate, it’s just like pulling teeth just to get a vote on anything.

“I think there’s some chance I can get a vote in the Senate…”

Woodruff wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:He'll be changing the wording to "Should the Federal Reserve be eliminated?", but he needs to wait for more people to vote first.

He's allowing folks to change their votes.

Isn't he just trolling?

Because it's never happened, right?

Phatscotty wrote:

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul tells Newsmax.TV that “the Federal Reserve needs oversight” and expects a full vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on legislation that would grant congressional oversight of the independent central bank.

“We need to have checks and balances,” the first-term Republican told Newsmax. “They are an agency that, basically, has destroyed 96 percent of the value of our currency over the last 100 years or so.

“We need to do something to have congressional oversight over what they do.”

On Wednesday, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted unanimously to authorize an investigation of the Fed to make it more accountable to lawmakers.

The measure was sponsored by Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul, a longtime Fed critic — and Rand’s father.

Sen. Paul introduced similar legislation in January 2011.

“I think it will pass the full House,” Rand Paul said of measure’s future prospects. He’s hoping for a vote this summer.

“There are many who don’t want to have a vote because they fear that a vote will pass. … We just have to get a vote.”

In the Senate, Paul said he’s “doing everything I can possibly do to get a vote. But over in the Senate, it’s just like pulling teeth just to get a vote on anything.

“I think there’s some chance I can get a vote in the Senate…”

A BILL -

To require a full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks by the Comptroller General of the United States before the end of 2012, 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 2011'.

SECTION 2. AUDIT REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY FOR THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.
(a) In General- Notwithstanding section 714 of title 31, United States Code, or any other provision of law, an audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks under subsection (b) of such section 714 shall be completed before the end of 2012.
(b) Report-
(1) IN GENERAL- A report on the audit required under subsection (a) 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.
(2) CONTENTS- The report under paragraph (1) 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.
(c) Repeal of Certain Limitations- Subsection (b) of section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking all after `in writing.'.
(d) Technical and Conforming Amendment- Section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking subsection (f).

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.459: