Ron Paul's latest book has arrived:
END THE FED
Get your copy now...
and send a powerful message to the unelected financial elite
that we will no longer tolerate their secretive dealings and shenanigans!

79% of Americans Now Favor Auditing The Federal Reserve


2 comments

So much for the ongoing secrecy of the nation’s independent central banking system. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 79% of Americans favor auditing the Federal Reserve and making the results available to the public. Just seven percent (7%) of adults think that’s a bad idea and oppose it. Fourteen percent (14%) aren’t sure.

Rasmussen Survey of 1,000 Adults
November 29-30, 2009

“A proposal has been made to audit the Federal Reserve and make the results available to the public. Do you favor or oppose auditing the Federal Reserve?”

Favor: 79%
Oppose: 7%
Not sure: 14%

This telephone survey of 1,000 Adults was conducted by Rasmussen Reports on November 29-30, 2009. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence (see methodology).

More at Rasmussen.com…

Obama Is Preparing Us For Perpetual War


5 comments

Channel: Fox Business
Date: 12/02/2009

Transcript:

News Anchor: In the meantime, we turn out attention from the health of the markets to the economic health of our nation. As the president announced last night that he will be sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan for this surge, a brief surge. Let’s take a listen.

Obama: Our prosperity provides a foundation for our power. It pays for our military, it underwrites our diplomacy, it taps the potential of our people and allows investment in new industry. And it will allow us to compete in this century as successfully as we did in the last. That’s why our troop commitment in Afghanistan cannot be open ended. Because the nation that I am most interested in building is our own.

News Anchor: Alright, we’re joined now for a Fox Business exclusive by Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas with his reaction. Congressman, thanks for joining us. What was your reaction to the speech last night?

Ron Paul: I think it’s a bit misleading. I think Obama is actually preparing us for perpetual war. He’s been warning us in that speech and elsewhere that we will be going into Pakistan. The idea that we’re going to bring our troops home eventually, I think, is just not so. And there is no way he can pay for this. It’s sort of like how are you going to pay for the medical care. “Oh yeah, we’re going to save enough money and we’ll pay for it and there will be no cost to it”. And now, this is going to cost hundreds of billions of dollars and we don’t have the money and it’s going to bring us down if we don’t stop it. So, I think it’s a flawed foreign policy, I think it’s a flawed economic policy, too, because you can’t pay for it. All wars are paid for through inflation. This will put just more pressure on the Fed to create more money because I don’t believe it would help us one bit to tax the people to pay for the war. They will try to, but that would be devastating to the economy to put a war tax on us at this point. So, in a way, they have no way out at this time unless they change policies.

News Anchor: So what would you suggest, Congressman?

Ron Paul: I’d suggest coming home. (more…)

RonPaul.com Store Audit the Federal Reserve Bumper Sticker I Support Ron Paul Bumper Sticker Ron Paul for President 2012 Bumper Sticker Ron Paul for President 2012 Bumper Sticker Ron Paul Revolution Bumper Sticker Ron Paul Mug Ron Paul Revolution Mousepad Audit the Fed Hat Ron Paul 2012 T-Shirt Audit the Fed T-Shirt Ron Paul Revolution T-Shirt

Ron Paul Speaks to Crowd of 2000 at ASU Conference


No comments yet

Today, Congressman Ron Paul delivered the keynote speech before 2,000 people at Arizona State University for the 1st Annual Arizona Campaign for Liberty State Convention.

Despite having to wait almost two hours for him to speak due to flight delays, Paul addressed an enthusiastic crowd at the university’s Memorial Union ballroom.

“It is great to see so many young people eager to hear the message of limited government, a noninterventionist foreign policy, and sound money,” said John Tate, President of Campaign for Liberty. “We hope that this movement continues to grow and more people are introduced to these ideas.”

Since the end of his 2008 presidential campaign, Ron Paul has been travelling regularly across the country speaking to groups of young people receptive to his message.

Ron Paul Answers Questions on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal


No comments yet

Channel: C-SPAN
Show: Washington Journal
Date: 12/03/2009

Transcript

Susan Swain: Former presidential candidate, Ron Paul of Texas, a member of the House Financial Services Committee and the author of the book “End the Fed” is our guest for our next program. Dr. Paul, thanks for coming in this morning.

Ron Paul: Thank you.

Susan Swain: One of the things I wanted to start with is the fact that Ben Bernanke is going to be up on the Senate side of the Hill today with a confirmation hearing on re-nomination of his position. You’ve been speaking about the Fed for quite a while now. It seems as though the chorus has gotten louder.

Ron Paul: There is no doubt about it. But I think it’s symbolic of the severity of our recession/depression. The people are very worried and they’re sending strong messages to Washington. I guess the reason that the bill I had to audit has become very popular. People are very, very concerned and I think rightfully they’re looking more closely at the Federal Reserve. It’s generally been ignored. As long as we’re surviving and doing well, they don’t look to the source of our problems. But now that we’re in serious trouble, people are becoming much more aware of how the Federal Reserve operates and how they participate in the crisis that we have.

Susan Swain: Give us a list of the tough questions that you would ask if you were on that panel questioning Chairman Bernanke today?

Ron Paul: Why do you think we should have a Federal Reserve at all? And why won’t you tell us how you spend the money, who do you buy the assets from and at what price? What kind of deals do you make with foreign governments and foreign central banks? What are the agreements? Have you ever been involved in the gold market, you ever buy and sell or loan the gold in order to keep the gold price lower? So, we can ask them a lot of questions, but we’ve asked those kinds of questions over the years and you never get answers.

Susan Swain: Is the information to any of those questions available?

Ron Paul: No, not really. To be sure, there are a lot of assumptions and people postulate. But we know approximately how many bad assets they brought up in the mortgage security market in the crisis; over 800 billion. We know they created money out of thin air to do that. We don’t know how much they paid and who they paid, who they bailed out, who they refused to bail out, because these assets were called illiquid. And illiquid means really they’re worthless. But indirectly the taxpayer ends up buying these and they probably paid these companies, Goldman Sachs or somebody like that, the nominal value – the face value. And it might have even been worthless or worth 10 cents on the dollar. (more…)

Ron Paul asks Robert Gates and Hillary Clinton if they support Bush Doctrine


1 comment

Venue: Joint Hearing on Afghanistan
Date: 12/02/2009

Transcript

Mr. Speaker: The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Paul.

Ron Paul: I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I welcome the panel today. I wished I could promise you an eloquent statement where I could convert all of you to a non-interventionist foreign policy and a policy where we’re not nation building, but I don’t think I can promise you that. I wished I could come up with some profound questions for the panel so that I could point out the inconsistencies not of the current foreign policy, but of the foreign policy that has been going on for quite a few decades. But all I can think about are some terms that come to mind that I’ve learned all the way back in the 1960s when I was serving as a military officer, an air force officer for 5 years. And I come up with thoughts like “quagmire”, “perpetual war for perpetual peace”, “war is the health of the state”, “war is a racket”, “truth is the first casualty of war”. And I think there is some profoundness to that and I had them plagiarized and those are not my thoughts. But today, we’re in a mess and we’re trying to figure out how to deal with it. We’ve had a war going on for 8 years. I think it has a lot to do with the way we get into the wars and then we try to justify why we’re there later on. One thing that almost all debates are prefaced by is, “Don’t come off as an extremist”. Can we have a military victory? Have 500,000 troops, go in there and win, like we used to? No, that’s off base.

But, you want to just come home? No, that’s not allowed. We have to have this balancing act which guarantees the politicizing of the war. This is why we end up with court martials and arguments that are justified. We end up with military tribunals and secret prisons because we’re not precise of what our goals are and why we’re involved. And I think that that is the biggest problem that we have. And what we need to do, I think, is try to be more precise about why we go into war.

Now the question I have for the panel, and I hope each and every one of you can answer this question, is. I would like to know whether or not you endorse the Bush doctrine. Ironically, last night a speech was given which truly was eloquent, but it was given in the same place that the former president gave a speech in 2002 and emphasized a profound, dramatic change in our attitude toward the world. And it is recognized now as the Bush doctrine. I think it’s maybe one of the most important events in our history when it comes down to foreign policy.

So, each and every one of you, do you endorse the Bush doctrine of preventive war, or do you reject it? (more…)

Ron Paul: Federal Reserve is Source of All Economic Downturns


2 comments

Venue: Congress
Date: 12/01/2009

Transcript

Ron Paul: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, does not want us to know any of the details of the Fed’s secret operations. This position is not surprising and has been typical of all central bank chairmen. Bernanke’s stated goal is, “To design a system of financial oversight that would provide a robust framework for preventing future crises”.

During its 96 years of existence, the Federal Reserve has played havoc with our economy and brought great suffering to millions through unemployment and price escalation. And it has achieved what only a central bank can – a steady depreciation of our currency. Today’s dollar is now worth 4 cents compared to the dollar entrusted to the Federal Reserve in 1913. 96 years should have been plenty of time for the Fed to come up with a plan for preventing economic crises.

Since the Fed is the source of all economic downturns, it’s impossible for any central banker to regulate in such a manner to prevent the problems that are predictable consequences of his own monetary management. The Federal Reserve fixes interest rates at levels inevitably lower than those demanded by the market. This manipulation is a form of price control through credit expansion and is the ultimate cause of business cycles and so many of our economic problems, generating the mal-investment, excessive debt, stock, bond, commodity and housing bubbles.

The Federal Reserve’s monetary inflation indeed does push the CPI upward, but concentrating on the government’s reports of the CPI and the PPI is nothing more than a distraction from the other harm done by the Federal Reserve’s effort at central economic planning through secret monetary policy operations.

Real inflation, the expansion of our money supply is greatly undercounted by these indices. In response to our latest financial crisis the Federal Reserve turned on its printing press and literally doubled the monetary base. This staggering creation of dollars has yet to be reflected in many consumer prices, but will ultimately hit the middle class and poor with a cruel devaluation of their savings and real earnings.

The Fed has clearly failed on its mandate to maintain full employment and price stability. It’s time to find out what’s going on. Instead of assuming responsibility for the Fed’s role in the crisis, Bernanke brags about “arresting” the crisis. I would suggest to Mr. Bernanke that it’s too early to brag. Bernanke decries any effort to gain transparency of the Fed’s actions to find out just who gets bailed out and who is left to fail. Instead, he proposes giving even more power to the Fed to regulate the entire financial system.

What he doesn’t recognize, nor does he want to admit, is that he is talking about symptom while ignoring the source of the crisis: the Federal Reserve itself. More regulations will never compensate for all the distortion and excesses caused by monetary inflation and artificially low interest rates. Regulation distracts from the real cause while further interfering with the market forces, thus guaranteeing that the recession will become much deeper and prolonged.

Chairman Bernanke’s argument for Fed secrecy is a red herring. It serves to distract so the special interests that benefit from the Fed’s policy never become known to the public. Who can possibly buy this argument that this secrecy is required to protect the people from political influence?

My bill, HR 1207, has nothing to do with interferences in monetary policy. This was explicitly stated in the amendment voted on in the Financial Services Committee. Bernanke’s argument for protecting the independence of the Fed is his argument for protecting the secrecy of the Fed.

Chairman Bernanke concludes that “America needs a strong (think cartel) non-political (think Goldman Sachs) and independent (think secret) central bank with the tools to promote financial stability in the midst of a horrendous financial crisis and to help steer our economy to recovery without inflation.”

This belief is a dream that one day will become a nightmare for all Americans unless we come to our sense, stop our wild spending, runaway deficits, printing-press money, massive bureaucratic regulations and our unnecessary world empire.

A crucial step towards fixing these problems will be transparency of the Federal Reserve.

Healthcare Freedom or Healthcare Bureaucracy?


7 comments

by Ron Paul

The U.S. Preventive Task Force caused quite a stir recently when they revised their recommendations on the frequency and age for women to get mammograms. Many have speculated on the timing for this government-funded report, with the Senate vote on health care looming, and cost estimates being watched closely. Just the hint that the government would risk women’s health to cut costs is causing outrage on both sides of the aisle.

Even the administration is alarmed at its own panel’s recommendation. One official, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius told women to ignore the new guidelines, keep doing what they are doing and make the best decisions for themselves after consulting with their doctors.

This sounds like an excellent idea to me. As a physician myself, I understand the importance of ensuring that patients are able to consult their doctors and make their own decisions without interference from government bureaucrats or government-favored corporations.

However, I am confused by the administration’s reasoning and apparent change of heart. Have they reversed their position on healthcare reform and now decided that patients and doctors should be in control of individual healthcare decisions? Or are they still in the healthcare central planning business? The healthcare reform plans currently aim to empower Congress to dictate to insurers minimal standards of coverage. Those government standards will ultimately be determined by politicians and bureaucrats, not individual patients and doctors.

It is naive to think that recommendations by an authoritative government panel will never be used to deny services to people that want them. It is sad to think that people will be forced to spend their hard-earned money for a one-size fits all, government mandated healthcare delivery model, but then have to scrape together additional funds to pay out of pocket for healthcare they really want or need – that is, if the government allows them to at all. After all, the federal government currently forbids Medicare beneficiaries from spending their own money on services covered by Medicare, if for whatever reason they need to. Why wouldn’t the government eventually apply these kinds of restrictions to everyone, if they are successful with this takeover? Beware of the supposed gifts offered to you by government, for when it gives you things with one hand, the other hand takes away your liberty and independence.

It remains to be seen what provisions will be in the final bill. We do know we have no funds to pay for it except for debt and money printed out of thin air. We know that the nation’s creditors are getting very nervous about the government’s continuous spending sprees and bailouts. We know this healthcare bill, like all government programs, will be expensive.

There will be a day of reckoning when the credit stops and the bills for all this spending come due. When that day comes and politicians and bureaucrats have to deal with reality, it will be very uncomfortable to find yourself in their liability column, which is where healthcare reform will put many more Americans.

Ron Paul: The Federal Reserve Creates Money Out Of Thin Air!


2 comments

On Monday night, Congressman Paul appeared on CNBC to debate former ITC chief economist Peter Morici over the Federal Reserve’s role in the economy and the need for greater transparency at the Fed.

Show: The Kudlow Report
Channel: CNBC
Date: 11/30/2009

Transcript

Lawrence Kudlow: Ben Bernanke took to the Washington Post yesterday to defend Fed independence, as he sees it, from legislation like Ron Paul’s, that would audit the Fed and force it to be more transparent. Mr. Paul’s amendment passed the House Financial Services Committee last week and is attracting broad bipartisan support. But it’s not without its detractors, including Chairman Barney Frank. Joining us now is the aforementioned Texas Republican Congressman and former presidential candidate, Mr. Ron Paul, and our friend in university professor and former chief economist for the international trade commission, Peter Morici. Hello.

First of all, thank you for your time, sir. You know, let’s see if I get this right. Article 1, section 8 of the US Constitution gives an enumerated monetary power to Congress, and I read, “To coin money and regulate the value thereof”, Mr. Paul. I don’t think the Fed has done a very good job regulating the value thereof. Is that behind your thinking, sir?

Ron Paul: Yeah, it certainly is. But what about their mandate that they were giving in 1913; that was to have full employment and maintain stable prices? Look at the monster they have created. And certainly the financial crisis that we have today; we shouldn’t be looking to the Fed to give them more power, we should be looking to them for an apology for creating this monster. Not only does Bernanke need to apologize, but I would Greenspan ought to apologize as well. (more…)

Ron Paul on Montel Across America


No comments yet

Show: Montel Across America
Host: Montel Williams
Date: 11/25/2009

Transcript

Montel Williams: We have the pleasure of being joined by one of our favorite guests here on “Montel Across America”. Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome him, he’s a congressman from the 14th district of Texas. Welcome, Congressman Ron Paul, to “Montel Across America”.

Ron Paul: Thank you.

Montel Williams: Thanks so much for being here today, sir – the day before turkey day. I’m going to ask you a little later on what you’re going to be doing tomorrow. But I wanted to talk to you a little bit about some things that are happening and headlines that the president last night went ahead and made his statement about when he will finally make a decision about Afghanistan. And he said this:

Obama: “After 8 years, some of those years in which we did not have, I think, either the resources or the strategy to get the job done, it is my intention to finish the job.”

Montel Williams: And him making that statement means, you know, the rumor mill is saying that he’s anticipating sending in about an additional 34,000 troops which will require an additional 15,000 to 20,000 support personnel that will go in with them. And when we take a look back at this war in Afghanistan, there is an argument about how many troops actually are there. We think that the current number of troops in Afghanistan is 68,000, earlier I said it was close to 100,000. But there are about 68,000 troops that are on the ground there. The president making this statement that he’s going to go ahead and make the decision and send in more troops and he’s going to ask NATO to send in more troops, I just wonder what do you think about this and what do you think the pushback is going to be from the American public? Because 66%-68% of the American public has had enough of this war. They are disappointed in the way the war is going and I have a feeling those numbers are going to go up now knowing that more of our sons and daughters are going to go off to die. What do you think, sir, about this decision?

Ron Paul: I think it’s a serious mistake. I think the American people are going to get more upset. We can’t provide policies and take care of people here at home, but we’re over there spending all this money and it’s a lot of money. I mean this could be huge if you send 35,000 – 40,000 more men over there; it could go into the billions of dollars. But I think the biggest shortcoming in his statement is he “wants to get the job done”. I don’t know what the job is, maybe you could tell me. That’s the real problem, nobody knows exactly what the job is.

If we’re threatened by a country and our national security is at stake, you have no difficulty describing the job and you don’t debate whether you have 35,000 or 40,000 troops and how much it’s going to cost you. You work hard to preserve the national security. But since this has nothing to do with national security, and we talk about a job, I think its way too vague and I’m really disappointed because this is the one area where I had hoped that he would help us. I think it helped him a lot in the campaign to take the position that he wanted to wind wars down. But not only do we have to worry about Afghanistan, but I’m really concerned about how many times we send these drones over into Pakistan and people over there aren’t very happy with us and I think we’re digging a much deeper hole for ourselves.

Montel Williams: And you know, congressman, I got to ask you: how are we going to get somebody down there in Washington DC to start asking some of these tough questions? You just talked about the drones that are going into Pakistan and then we found out yesterday that there has been a so classified, I bet even you don’t have the clearances to know some information about the private sub-contracted run hit squads, special operations that are going on right now and the money that is being spent. And I take a look at some of the figures that just came out about the amount that the defense department has spent on the war from 2000 to 2009. It’s 5 trillion 600 billion dollars. But they don’t even quote the numbers that we’re paying to these sub-contractors.

Ron Paul: How many people could get healthcare with about 1/10th of that? You know, this is just money down a rat hole and the military-industrial complex loves it and they make these plans. I just have difficulty understanding the obsession with this, the inability to reassess and say, “We’ve made a mistake, let’s change policy. Let’s just come home and offer friendship, offer peace, offer trade with them.” I’m sure it’s a very imperfect country over there and it’s a very imperfect country here. But we still do our very best, but I just think the more troops we send over there and the more people that die, the greater danger that we’re in; both financially and more people are hating our guts. How would we react if some of the treatment that we place on those other countries… if somebody did that to us? We would be outraged and we would be unified, too. There would be no dissent in this country; we’d all be unified. That’s why the dissenters, whether they’re in Iran or Afghanistan or any place who want true reform, we totally neutralize them. So I see this as a policy that we follow doing exactly the opposite of what they’re pretending to do.

Montel Williams: And also, sir, will there be and should there be and can we call for some sort of congressional investigation into the amount of money that’s being lobbied with and paid into some of your peers’ campaign war chest to lobby for more war funding? A couple weeks ago we did a little look at some of the people and some of the greatest offenders who received $700,000, $400,000, $200,000 from military sub-contractors to continue to vote and lobby to send more troops and to continue this war. You know, in some ways are some of your peers literally talking out of both sides of their mouth? They’re saying they want to bring the war to an end, yet they have people lobbying them and trying to press for more troops.

Ron Paul: Well, yes. It should be investigated. You know Cunningham was caught at it and he’s in jail, but that’s a rarity. I think the system breeds that. A lot of it is so-called legal and ethical because it’s part of the system. You can lobby, you can put money in and who knows when it’s quid-pro-quo and how much of it is cash. So, it’s the system. But I also see the system breeding this because government has so much to offer. If we weren’t fighting all these wars, think how small the military-industrial complex would be. But they drive our foreign policy and then you can see where the pressure comes from to keep building. (more…)

Ron Paul: 313 Members of Congress Have Co-Signed HR 1207


10 comments

Date: 11/23/2009
Channel: CNBC
Show: Squawk Box

Transcript

Judd Gregg: For the Congress to get into monetary policy is just absolutely inexcusable. We can’t handle fiscal policy, but now we want to manage monetary policy? One of the great strengths of our nation is the independent Fed. And this idea which is coming out of the House, which is populous fervor … pandering populism is what it is … is absolutely wrong.

Joe Kernen: That was Senator Judd Gregg on Friday responding to Congressman Ron Paul’s efforts to impose tighter scrutiny on the Fed. Here now with more is Representative Ron Paul, a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Good to see you, Congressman. And Senator Gregg likes you, he says you guys are buddies and everything. The one thing it’s hard to disagree with is: look what the Congress has given us for fiscal policy; now you want to run monetary policy. That sounds insane.

Ron Paul: Well, that isn’t the purpose of the amendment; it had nothing to do with running monetary policy. It was trying to find out what the Fed has been doing and how they’ve been spending the money and who benefits. But if you want to be a strict constitutionalist, there is a lot more defense of the Congress being involved with defending the value of the currency rather than delivering this responsibility over to the Fed.

And pandering? Well, in the sense I do like pandering to the people because it’s the people that are behind this thing. I mean, 75% of the people right now want an audit. Because of the pressure of the people on the Congress we have 313 members of Congress who have co-signed this legislation. Even during the debate last week we had 4 new people sign on at the last minute, realizing that this is very, very important.

And the people deserve to know what’s going on, how they spend the money, what assets they buy, how much they pay, are they paying market rates, are they buying up illiquid assets that aren’t worth anything and dumping it on the tax payer through the creation of new money?

So I would say the momentum is on the side of the people, it’s against secrecy. The Federal Reserve says they want independence; every time they say independence everybody who defends the Fed when they say, “We need independence”, what they’re talking about is secrecy. And what I am talking about is transparency. (more…)

Audit the Fed: A Major Triumph for Transparency and Accountability


16 comments

Audit the Fed Attached as an Amendment

by Ron Paul

I was pleased last week when we won a vote in the Financial Services Committee to include language from the Audit the Fed bill HR1207 in the upcoming financial regulatory reform bill. As it stands now, if HR 3996 passes, because of this action, the Federal Reserve’s entire balance sheet will be opened up to a GAO audit. We will at last have a chance to find out what happened to the trillions of dollars the Fed has been giving out.

Finally, the blanket restrictions on GAO audits of the Fed that have existed since 1978 will be removed. All items on the Fed’s balance sheet will be auditable, including all credit facilities, all securities purchase programs, and all agreements with foreign central banks. To calm fears that we might be trying to substitute congressional action for Fed mischief in tinkering with monetary policy, we agreed to a 180 day lag time before details of the Fed’s market actions are released and included language to state explicitly that nothing in the amendment should be construed as interference in or dictation of monetary policy by Congress or the GAO. This left no reasonable objections standing and the amendment passed with a vote of 43 to 26.

This was a major triumph for transparency and accountability in government. With unprecedented turmoil in the financial markets, the people are demanding to know and understand the extent of the Federal Reserve’s involvement in the creation of out-of-control business cycles, who they are helping, and how. We need information. The excuses for not giving out this information are flimsy at best, and the passage of this amendment is a major step to finally getting at the truth.

Of course I could not have done this without the help and support of many other members who have been strong allies in this fight. Having over 300 cosponsors was obviously helpful.

However, as great as this victory is, we have to remember that this amendment is attached to a bill that would give sweeping new powers to the Federal Reserve. The Fed has taken its mandate to maintain stable prices and full employment and used its immense power to help elite friends at the great expense of everyone else. The answer is not to increase their powers and ability to interfere in the economy, but that is what the legislation will do. It is a disaster waiting to happen, and unfortunately it looks as if it will pass.

At least with the Audit the Fed amendment attached to the bill, the Fed will not be able to do its destructive work in secret. The people will know exactly who the beneficiaries are of this immoral system of money management.

House Panel Votes to Audit the Fed


No comments yet

Channel: CNBC
Date: 11/20/2009

Transcript

Host: Congress is trying to gain more control over the Fed. A proposal by Texas Republican Ron Paul making it through the House Financial Services Committee late yesterday. Senior economic reporter Steve Lisman getting that information on that right now. Steve, what do you have?

Steve Liesman: Lisa, thank you very much. I just talked to a senior congressional staffer about this surprise passage of the Ron Paul amendment last night to the Regulatory Reform Bill that would allow audits of the Fed’s monetary policy.

Fed officials fear could be a major blow to its independence and possibly threaten higher inflation. The congressional staffer I talked to suggested that Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee will continue to look for opportunities to alter the Paul amendment. What he said was, “The desire for Chairman Frank is to make sure monetary policy is truly independent. He will continue to work with his colleagues to make sure that there is no ambiguity there.” That’s the statement that we just received from the congressional staffer.

What’s all this coming from? A 1987 congressional exclusion barred the GAO, the Government Accounting Office, from auditing the Fed’s monetary policy. They could audit every part of the Fed and indeed there are nineteen other audits in the GAO going on right now, but not about monetary policy. The Paul amendment, which passed like 43 to 26, essentially repeals that exemption. Ron Paul, when interviewed last week on Squat Box, defended his bill.

Ron Paul: “Seventy-five percent of the American people say, yeah, we should know what’s going on with the Fed. So that’s 75 percent of the electorate saying that we should do our job and look at the Fed. It is the reason why there are well over two-thirds of the members of Congress supporting this bill.”

Steve Liesman: So that’s Ron Paul with 300 co-sponsors on one hand. CNBC [found] opposition to the amendment included both former chairmen of the Fed, Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker, in a rare letter signed by both of them. They said, “We can assure you that this protection of internal deliberations and reaching decisions is indispensable in the Federal conduct of monetary policy.”

The Fed’s real concern: it’s all ready going to be under a sort of a political pressure when it comes time to raise rates. Unemployment will be unusually high, most likely when the Fed raises rates. Their fear is that this bill could increase that political pressure.