The Federal Reserve—Deadly Hostility to the Constitution

Vijay Kumar for Congress Blog ^ | 24 February 2010 | Vijay Kumar

[Denriddy]

The Federal Reserve is unconstitutional and must be abolished, returning the powers it has usurped to the Legislative Branch where those powers irrevocably were granted by the People of the United States. ...Any argument that the Federal Reserve was created under the "necessary and proper" clause is absurd. The entire bleat of the Federal Reserve against being audited is to preserve its "independence" in monetary policy! That is a blatant admission that it is a law unto itself, a sovereign that has usurped control of, stolen, the entire wealth of this nation.

[semantic]

Have you guys seen this excellent analysis of regional human networks performed on over 200m Facebook accounts? It provides a fascinating look as to how the US may look after the crack-up boom:

To no one's surprise, the next century will belong to Greater Texas + Dixie.

[Sprite518]

Wrong... Barney Frank voted against it. He voted against bringing it on the floor to vote. Here is the way they voted. As you can see ALL the Republicans voted for it. It was only the Democrats that are against this.

HR 1207

Democrats
MA-04 Rep. Barney Frank nay
PA-11 Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski nay
CA-35 Rep. Maxine Waters nay
NY-14 Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney nay
IL-04 Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez nay
NY-12 Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez nay
NC-12 Rep. Melvin L. Watt nay
NY-05 Rep. Gary L. Ackerman nay
CA-27 Rep. Brad Sherman aye
NY-06 Rep. Gregory W. Meeks nay
KS-03 Rep. Dennis Moore nay
MA-08 Rep. Michael E. Capuano nay
TX-15 Rep. Rubén Hinojosa aye
MO-01 Rep. William Lacy Clay aye
NY-04 Rep. Carolyn McCarthy nay
CA-43 Rep. Joe Baca
MA-09 Rep. Stephen F. Lynch nay
CA-42 Rep. Gary G. Miller nay
GA-13 Rep. David Scott aye
TX-09 Rep. Al Green nay
MO-05 Rep. Emanuel Cleaver nay
IL-08 Rep. Melissa L. Bean nay
WI-04 Rep. Gwen Moore nay
NH-02 Rep. Paul W. Hodes aye
MN-05 Rep. Keith Ellison nay
FL-22 Rep. Ron Klein nay
OH-06 Rep. Charles Wilson nay
CO-07 Rep. Ed Perlmutter aye
IN-02 Rep. Joe Donnelly nay
IL-14 Rep. Bill Foster nay
IN-07 Rep. Andre Carson nay
CA-12 Rep. Jackie Speier aye
MS-01 Rep. Travis Childers aye
ID-01 Rep. Walt Minnick aye
NJ-03 Rep. John Adler aye
OH-15 Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy nay
OH-01 Rep. Steve Driehaus aye
FL-24 Rep. Suzanne Kosmas aye
FL-08 Rep. Alan Grayson aye
CT-04 Rep. Jim Himes nay
MI-09 Rep. Gary Peters aye
NY-25 Rep. Dan Maffei aye

Republicans

AL-06 Rep. Spencer Bachus aye
TX-19 Rep. Randy Neugebauer aye
DE-01 Rep. Michael N. Castle aye
NY-03 Rep. Peter King aye
CA-40 Rep. Edward R. Royce aye
OK-03 Rep. Frank D. Lucas aye
TX-14 Rep. Ron Paul (sponsor) aye
IL-16 Rep. Donald A. Manzullo aye
NC-03 Rep. Walter B. Jones aye
IL-13 Rep. Judy Biggert aye
NC-13 Rep. Brad Miller

WV-02 Rep. Shelley Moore Capito aye
TX-05 Rep. Jeb Hensarling aye
NJ-05 Rep. Scott Garrett aye
SC-03 Rep. J. Gresham Barrett aye
PA-06 Rep. Jim Gerlach aye
GA-06 Rep. Tom Price aye
NC-10 Rep. Patrick T. McHenry aye
CA-48 Rep. John Campbell aye
FL-12 Rep. Adam Putnam aye
MN-06 Rep. Michele Bachmann aye
TX-24 Rep. Kenny Marchant aye
MI-11 Rep. Thaddeus McCotter aye
CA-22 Rep. Kevin McCarthy aye
FL-15 Rep. Bill Posey aye
KS-02 Rep. Lynn Jenkins aye
NY-26 Rep. Christopher Lee aye
MN-03 Rep. Erik Paulsen aye
NJ-07 Rep. Leonard Lance aye

However, The bill was attached to a horrible financial “reform” bill which calls for the creation of yet another government agency to regulate private industry. So of course Ron Paul voted against it on principle, despite the fact that it contains the “Audit the Fed” bill he’s worked so hard for.

[bvw]

This depicts a Federal Reserve note that you use today. It does not have a payee, a due date, or an amount that is to be paid in money. Hence, it is NOT a note. It contains the words "This note is legal tender for all debts public and private." This means that Federal Reserve notes have value only by government edict and, by our [CONSTITUTION'S] definition of money, cannot be considered as proper money.

By Edict -- that means the measure is arbitrary, not standard. Violates the Constitution.

[semantic]

Why wait for the courts? Nature (actually, math ie law of exponents) is in charge at this point. To wit, the Fed is insolvent, as is the USA. The debt cannot be paid, therefore it must be defaulted.

Have you ever been involved in a turn-around situation? I have - many, many times (I'm a bean counter). The first thing you do is discard the debt. If that requires a new entity in which to acquire whatever assets remain, so be it.

That's how this situation is going to play out. A new federation of states will be necessary simply as a means of getting out from our un-payable obligations. (Totaling over $100 trillion if one adds in unfunded SS & Medicare.)

All we have to do is have the states create a holding "company" called USA 2.0, and let USA 1.0 and the Fed holding the (worthless) bag of worthless currencies, bonds & promises.

Ultimately, it will come down to the military. It's not like it's any mystery to their war gamers who well understand that our current system cannot provide sufficient wealth in which to afford both guns & butter. So which one is it gonna be? I'll give you one guess.

[Mase]

Bernake didn't fully grasp the gravity of what the government did to create the financial crisis therefore the Fed is unconstitutional?

I like that quote from Jefferson. In fact, George Washington, the greatest president in our history, had so much confidence in Jefferson's understanding of banking and finance he made him our first Secretary of the Treasury. No, wait......

It sounds as though you prefer the likes of Barney and Chuckie managing our supply of money rather than a relatively independent and less political organization like the Fed. Is it because Charlie and Chuckie have a better understanding of finance and economics than the members of the Fed? Or, is it because you think we'd be much better off today had we remained an agrarian society?

[DannyTN]

"The reason this is happening is because the Federal Reserve allows congress to spend."

No, the Federal Reserve doesn't "allow" Congress to spend. Congress borrowed and spent long before the Federal Reserve existed.

Notice also, that we had several depressions in the 1800's and that debt was much lower in the Great Depression than it was subsequently.

So while public debt is certainly a factor, you can't blame the current economic crisis on the debt level. Rather, I blame the economic crisis on:

1. The oil price shock which we knew was coming for 35 years and did nothing to avoid,
2. A stupid free trade policy that has allowed third world countries to strip our manufacturing base from us, not unlike what happened to England. Congressman Hyde (R) warned us about this back during 90's when Gingrich was pushing free trade.
3. A relaxing of banking reserve ratios to historic lows and repeal of banking restrictions that allowed them to engage in riskier behavior.
4. A credit card industry that has been allowed to operate with zero consumer protections.
5. The mortgage industry only to the extent that there were some inflated valuations. The mortage industry gets blamed a lot, but the reason people started defaulting on the mortgages were all of the above.

[bvw]

With that attitude you are a loser.

[Mase]

And in 100 years no one has challenged and won a case against something that is so obviously unconstitutional? Whaddaya gotta do to find a good lawyer these days?

Do you never wonder why? Could you be wrong? Nah, not a chance. Tell you what, you send me all of your unconstitutional money and I'll find out if others consider it "proper" or not. I promise to get right back to you. It's just the kind of guy I am.

[bvw]

When coined money is of standard weight of specified alloy of metal, and any paper may be exchanged for that weight -- neither government nor agency need 'manage' money.

To wit: 'Manageable' money is un-Constitutional prima facie, because it is not a standard measure of weighed coinage.

[DannyTN]

"To coin Money is intimately associated by that grammatical construct with a STANDARD weight and measure. Fiat money that is not backed by a fixed weight standard is thus un-Constitutional."

Fiat money has been around since before Christ. If congress had intended to prohibit fiat money, surely they could have written their desire plainer than that. In fact the Continentals issued during the Revolutionary war were fiat money.

[Sprite518]

Your chart validates my point. The only spike prior to the Federal Reserve was during the Civil War. Look at what happens after the Federal Reserve was created 1913.

Congress can not borrow without the backing of the Federal Reserve. That is why they were created. BTW, where do you think the Reserve gets their money?

[bvw]

Why? The why is clear. Dishonesty.

The fix: Massive injections of Honesty.

Warning: Nature injects Honesty when responsible people do not stand up and step forward boldly to do so. Nature in that case is very painful, even in cases: genocidal.

[bvw]

That’s a idiot’s response.

[Sprite518]

If really hope you are implying that Jefferson did not understand money. LOL!

Barney and Chuckie are against this, because they cannot spend like drunken whores. It will greatly reduce their ability to spend like no tomorrow. As you already know they are only to of 535 members in congress.

[Sprite518]

Thank you for backing me up! The ignorance of the Federal Reserve by some in this thread is astounding.

[DannyTN]

"You obviously do not know your history when it comes to the central bank. That's okay because most people do not. I will admit to you I knew more about the CIA then I did the Federal Reserve until about 3 years ago."

Actually, I have a Masters degree in Finance from a top business school. You admit that most of what you learned about the Federal Reserve you accumulated in the last 3 years.

I would urge you to keep learning and not just from internet sources. Go pick up a MacroEconomics text book from a used book store and read the truth about how the Fed manages the money supply and how the Fed is organized and where the profits really go. The answer is not the scare mongering you read on the internet.

If all the founders were so strongly against a central bank, why did they include the provision to coin money in the constitution? Why did Congress charter the Bank of North America in 1781 just 5 years after the Declaration of Independence? And why after the constitution was adopted in 1787 was the First Bank of the U.S. chartered just 4 years later in 1791? There were some founding fathers against a central bank, but many were not.

[Mase]

Uh, ok. The Federal Reserve is unconstitutional because you say it is. Got it. Letting Congress (Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, Charlie Rangel, Bernie Sanders, Barbara Boxer and so on) determine the proper supply of money is what winners want to see happen. Congress only acts in the best interests of the people, right? One hundred years with no successful challenges to the constitutionality of the Fed not withstanding, only losers believe the Fed is legitimate.

[DannyTN]

"Your chart validates my point. The only spike prior to the Federal Reserve was during the Civil War. Look at what happens after the Federal Reserve was created 1913."

The chart doesn't validate your point. Your point was that the Federal Reserve allowed Congress to spend. Clearly the U.S. was borrowing and spending money long before the Federal Reserve.

That the chart spikes during the world wars to levels not seen before nor since does not validate your point against the Federal Reserve.

That England had a higher debt level than we did then or do now, also does not validate your point. We are not broke. I agree with you that the spending is out of control and we are spending on stupid stuff instead of the nation's infrastructure needs. But we are a long ways from broke, and it's Congress's fault, not the Federal Reserve.

[The Comedian]

To no one's surprise, the next century will belong to Greater Texas + Dixie.

God bless us, every one. I see a fascinating similarity to Igor Panarin's USA Breakup Map

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[Mase]

Yeah, Jefferson understood money and banking so well Washington appointed him to be the first Secretary of the Treasury. No, wait...that was Hamilton.

Don't get me wrong, I really like Jefferson. However, I am very thankful men like Hamilton offered a different point of view and Washington was wise enough to listen.