Did the Testimony of Tom Woods Come Too Close to Home for Barney Frank?

Economic Policy Journal ^ | 9/28/09 | Robert Wenzel

[FromLori]

During the testimony by Tom Woods on Friday, in favor of H.R. 1207, Congressman Barney Frank stepped up to the plate with some hostile questioning. I'll let Woods give the play by play: In my opening remarks I added to my written statement, which I wasn’t strictly reading, a phrase for which Barney Frank (D-MA) would take me to task. In my written statement, I noted that the Fed is indeed independent in the sense that it can make trillions of dollars available to unknown friends on unknown terms. I then wrote that I couldn’t imagine any self-respecting American hesitating for a moment to challenge that kind of independence. In my oral remarks, after "self-respecting American" I added the words "who isn’t bought and paid for."

Note that I wasn’t saying that anyone who opposes HR 1207 is necessarily in the pay of anyone. I was suggesting that people who thought it was just fine for the Fed to have such extraordinary discretionary powers might have a material interest at stake in the question.

As surely true as those words are, whether I should have said them is obviously debatable. But Barney Frank’s shocked and indignant reply was still a bit over the top. Who is bought and paid for, he demanded to know. Well, how about the firms on the receiving end of Fed largesse, for one? How many of those oppose this kind of Fed independence (and how many support 1207)? I didn’t want to get into this particular subject, but I mentioned the work of Professor Lawrence H. White of George Mason University, who has shown the economics profession to be completely in thrall to the Fed – what with millions of dollars in research grants (one of the points I made to Congressman Frank) and countless other levers of influence. (See his [.pdf] article "The Federal Reserve’s Influence on Research in Monetary Economics." You might also note the more recent article on the Huffington Post, "Priceless: How the Federal Reserve Bought the Economics Profession," making the same point.) When we read about monetary economists urging the maintenance of Fed "independence," therefore, surely it’s not unreasonable to bear these factors in mind. Of course, maybe the problem that Frank had with Woods' testimony is that it hit a little too close to home. Many of Frank's donors are clear beneficiaries of Fed money printing activities. The top donor to Frank, so far, in 2009/10 is FMR Corp (the parent name for Fidelity). Others in the top 20 donors for Frank include the American Bankers Association, the American Financial Services Assn, the Independent Community Bankers of America and, one of the greatest beneficiaries of past easy money policy, the National Assn of Home Builders. Did Frank have a guilty conscience and mistakenly think that Woods was referring to him?

[HiTech RedNeck]

Talking about Frank’s FRIENDS!

[sloop]

didn't ge get to have their gmac become a bank - that would let them walk up to the fed window?

[FromLori]

I don’t recall if it was gmac you are probably right I know he did for one of them.

[Juan Medén]

All of this makes sense except the reference to Barney Frank’s “guilty conscience.” Everyone knows that Barney Frank has no conscience — otherwise he would not be able to sleep at night . . . next to those boys.

[Venturer]

I thought the part about self-respecting let Barney out. Then he mentioned bought and paid for and that brought Barney back in.

Certainly anyone outside Massatwoshits knows that Barney isnt worthy of respect: self ,or otherwise.

[xcamel]

“Did Frank have a guilty conscience and mistakenly think that Woods was referring to him?”

The author is kidding, right?
Bawny has been on the take since the day he first took office.

[maine yankee]

The best congressman money can buy !

[4Speed]

ping