Who Regulates the Fed
In a word, noone. Officially, we have the propaganda that the federal reserve system is a quasi-governmental entity, but with semi-private privileges. The explanation however goes in loops and tries to circumnavigate a very concise explanation. No one in government oversees the Fed. No one in government can overrule the Fed. No one can hold accountable the Fed. No one in government can bring to justice the Fed. In fact, the Fed is untouchable. In fact, the Fed is above the law. In fact, the Fed operates with impunity.
The Official Explanation of Who Regulates the Federal Reserve Banks
The Federal Reserve is a unique legal entity that can be described as an independent government agency with member bank participation. It is organized with a 100% government agency at the top (the Board of Governors), and branches beneath them that are organized like corporations with member banks as shareholders.(Ref: http://www.federalreserveeducation.org/fed101/structure/ , http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#4 )
The Board of Governors are all appointed for 14-year terms by the president and confirmed by congress. It operates per it’s charter and laws set by congress. it is overseen by congress. There is no structure or mechanism for private ownership at this level; it is a government agency. You can confirm this from a number of government sites that list it as a government agency (e.g. http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/independent-agencies.html) Board members are forbidden by law to have any economic interest in a private bank. (Ref: Title 12 chapter 3 of the U.S. Legal Code). The Board determines monetary policy and provides high level oversight of the branches.
The 12 branches can be considered highly regulated private corporations. Member banks are required to buy shares in their branch. Each bank has one vote. They can vote for 6 of their 9 board members, the other 3 are appointed by the Board of Governors. Though the branches are called non-profit, the member banks get a standard 6% dividend on their shares. The remaining ‘profit’ is turned over to the Treasury at the end of the year.
For confirmation on this, check out how Hoovers classifies them:
And those shares that the member banks own? Some say there are so many restrictions that it falls short of true ownership
From Edward Griffin, noted anti-fed intellect (http://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm)
“It’s a hybrid, part corporation and part government, part private, part government.
Every bank that’s in the system is an owner of the Federal Reserve… But that’s as far as it goes because those stock certificates do not carry with them any of the attributes of private ownership. For example, the holders of these certificates cannot sell them. If you can’t sell something then you don’t really own it, that’s one of the tests of ownership, your ability to dispose of it. You cannot sell it. Furthermore the larger banks put up more money than the smaller banks, it’s a ratio to their assets, so the larger banks have more stock certificates in the system than the small ones and yet regardless of the number that they hold, every bank has just one vote. There’s another violation of the principle of private ownership. Furthermore that vote doesn’t buy them anything. They can’t vote for anything of substance; they cannot vote for their national management which is the most important thing, isn’t it? The board of directors and chairman of the Federal Reserve System are appointed by the President, they’re not elected by the banks that are part of the system, the President does that.”
But, let’s go over a couple of things in this explanation. Bear in mind what I said earlier, that noone can oversee them.
The Board of Governors are all appointed for 14-year terms by the president and confirmed by congress
This is a red herring. It assumes that because of some appointment power, that the government has some authority over the bank. On print that looks great. In practice, this is nothing more than Napoleon making the Pope crown him. The “appointees” are hand picked and given to the president and congress. They wouldn’t dare choose anyone but those who they were told to choose.
It operates per it’s charter and laws set by congress. it is overseen by congress.
Again, this looks great on paper, but in practice it is just not done. No congressman can sit in on any federal reserve meeting. Congress is not advised of the goings on of the meetings. In fact, congress is told, quite frequently, to shut-up asking about the meetings. Not only that, but should congress hand the Fed something, congress is well aware that they cannot then ask about the very object they handed to the Fed.
Board members are forbidden by law to have any economic interest in a private bank. (Ref: Title 12 chapter 3 of the U.S. Legal Code). The Board determines monetary policy and provides high level oversight of the branches.
If I sent a simpleton to your house to borrow your sugar, and then fed the simpleton cookies, made from the very sugar I had him borrow, can it be said that the simpleton has not profited from the sugar? Much is made of this clause that the Fed members cannot have interest in a private bank. But, what is not said that there are many “non-private” banks. In fact, as we’ll see, the board holds interest in the Federal Reserve Banks.
Member banks are required to buy shares in their branch. Each bank has one vote. They can vote for 6 of their 9 board members, the other 3 are appointed by the Board of Governors. Though the branches are called non-profit, the member banks get a standard 6% dividend on their shares.
This might look standard until you valuate how much profit the Fed makes each year. And, again the board does in fact hold interest in a bank, just not a private one. Where do the Fed profits come from? The Federal Reserve Bank makes profits off of the taxpayers of America.
And those shares that the member banks own? Some say there are so many restrictions that it falls short of true ownership
Who cares about the restrictions of ownership if you have 6% of every dollar ever printed in America. This is just another red herring. The “restrictions” in question forbid the holder of the shares from being able to sell them. But, correct me if I am wrong but, who on the planet would be insane enough to sell a share in the monetary system of America? It is literally like having a share in God, with a restriction that you cannot sell a share in God. What exactly would you trade a share in God for? It is literally, by definition, the logical fallacy of false dilemma. This line of “reasoning” is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false.
- I have shares in the Federal Reserve Bank
- I cannot have a conflict of interest when dealing with taxpayer money, which the bank makes profits off of
- I cannot trade my shares
- therefore I must be trustworthy and have absolutely no conflict of interest
This was literally drafted into the article creating the Fed, to confuse people and give a sense of propriety to an organization that is literally pillaging the entire country.
We literally have a private bank that is funneling money through it’s coffers and then doling it out to its friends, its own banks.
If it can be believed, the bank has had people killed that came against it. Some even say Lincoln and Kennedy were shot by the bank.
Bankers killed Lincoln: In this conspiracy scenario, John Wilkes Booth was the “hit man,” the “hired gun” for the powerful British bankers, the Rothschilds. According to this assassination theory, the Rothschilds had offered loans to the Lincoln administration at very high interest, assuming that the Union had no choice other than to accept their outrageous terms. The frugal and resourceful frontiersman spirit in Lincoln caused him to refuse the Rothschilds’ offer and to acquire the necessary funds elsewhere. Although his refusal only stung their sense of pride and greed, the true reason for their planning his assassination was their knowledge that after the war Lincoln’s policies indicated a mild Reconstruction of the South that would encourage a resumption of agriculture rather than industry. Additional post-war policies destroyed the Rothschilds’ commodity speculations. With Lincoln out of the way, the Rothschilds planned to exploit the weaknesses of the United States and take over its economy.
“…Predictably Lincoln, needing money to finance his war effort, went with his secretary of the treasury to New York to apply for the necessary loans. The money changers wishing the Union to fail offered loans at 24% to 36%. Lincoln declined the offer. An old friend of Lincoln’s, Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago was put in charge of solving the problem of how to finance the war. His solution is recorded as this. ‘Just get Congress to pass a bill authorising the printing of full legal tender treasury notes… and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also.’
When Lincoln asked if the people of America would accept the notes Taylor said. ‘The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money; as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution.’
Lincoln agreed to try this solution and printed 450 million dollars worth of the new bills using green ink on the back to distinguish them from other notes. “The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers….. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government’s greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power. The solution worked so well Lincoln was seriously considering adopting this emergency measure as a permanent policy. This would have been great for everyone except the money changers who quickly realised how dangerous this policy would be for them….”
On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.
When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy – the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money – without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy’s Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: “to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury’s vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.
“United States Notes” were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a “Federal Reserve Note” issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a “United States Note” from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy’s Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says “Federal Reserve Note” on the top while the other says “United States Note”. Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number.
President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper “currency” circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.
Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new “money”. Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something.
In the intelligence community, there is a saying, “In the business of covert ops, there are no such things as coincidences.”. Putting forward a very easy scapegoat for the public to see is the “birdie” the photographer uses to placate the public. Keep your eyes on the conveniently placed presidential assassin that suddenly appeared on the doorsteps of the FBI. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. It could not possibly be that these presidents sought to overthrow the banking power houses and ended up dead by their hands.