RSS Feeds Feeds: Articles | Issues
Articles About TAP Subscribe Donate
TAPPED  |  Beat the Press

Remember Me
Forgot your password?

The symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.


 


Dean Baker's commentary on economic reporting

Washington Post Misses Again in Editorial on the Fed

The Washington Post editorial board once again missed the boat in trying to argue the case against an audit of the Fed, getting both the facts and the logic wrong. Starting with the facts, the Post confidently told readers that: "it's uncontroversial to keep Fed decisions about setting interest rates and other traditional functions confidential."

Umm, actually no. It's uncontroversial that they should be made available to the public. Since the early 90s the Fed has made the transcripts of its open market committee meetings available to the public with a 5-year lag. They may be some dispute about whether the time lag should be longer or shorter, but there is no big push to reverse the policy of making the transcripts available.

In terms of the logic, a major concern of many proponents of the Paul-Grayson bill to audit the Fed is to try to insert democratic control as a check on the financial sector's influence on the Fed. The banks actually appoint most of the members of the open market committee that decides monetary policy. This should be unacceptable in a democracy.

While in the Post's pretend land the Fed is an independent actor, making decisions that are best for everyone, in the real world, the Fed is overly responsive to the interests of the financial sector. This is a main motivation behind the support for the Paul-Grayson bill -- a motivation that went completely unmentioned in the Post editorial.

--Dean Baker



COMMENTS

So isn't it also uncontroversial to keep deliberations confidential for 5 years?

One of the great traditional recommendations for "independent" central banking is that it removes the onus of raising interest rates from politicians. Raising interest rates is always unpopular, and it's nice for politicians to be able to blame the "independent" central bank.

The GFC has created a new recommendation for independent central banking. When there is an almighty crash, the politicians can point to the independent central bank, and pretend that (a) it's all their fault and (b) that they're wonderful people and we need to assist them to bail out failed institutions. Never mind that (a) and (b) aren't entirely compatible.

It's time to ask whether independent central banking is acceptable in a democracy.

More thumb-sucking faith in another of our nation's failed institutions, from the apparatchiks at the Beltway Pravda.

Your article is write very well, I like it very much ~
I wish you have a wonderful day!Thank you.
classic ugg boots

I am very like it, I wish you happy every day!

ugg london

Post a comment


Renew your print subscription or e-subscription.
Get an e-subscription for $14.95.
Give the gift of political insight. Send The American Prospect to a friend.
Change your email address or street address.
YES! I want to receive The American Prospect
— the essential source for progressive ideas.
Explore The American Prospect's award-winning investigative journalism and provocative essays in a free trial issue. Continue receiving The American Prospect at only $19.95 for a one-year subscription - a savings of 60% off the newsstand price!
First Name
Last Name
Address 1
Address 2
City
State
ZIP     
Email

Should you decide not to continue receiving the magazine after the initial free issue, simply write "cancel" on the invoice and you will not be billed.

© 2010 by The American Prospect, Inc.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Permissions and Reprints