The Big Bank Bailout Bill H.R. 4173 and the Committee for Truth in Politics
by Chuck Moe | 12:34 pm, February 8, 2010 | Comments Off
You may have seen an this ad recently in Colorado (video and audio is bad)
Is the ad as FactCheck.org claims misleading? Technically, H.R. 4173 does give the Federal Reserve the ability to spend up to 4 trillion dollars as Bloomberg columnist David Reilly notes:
It authorizes Federal Reserve banks to provide as much as $4 trillion in emergency funding the next time Wall Street crashes. So much for “no-more-bailouts” talk. That is more than twice what the Fed pumped into markets this time around. The size of the fund makes the bribes in the Senate’s health-care bill look minuscule.
What FactCheck.org contends is that this is just a change to existing powers the Federal Reserve already has so there should be no worries. Granted, the Federal Reserve by virtue of rule 13 (3) of the Federal Reserve Act does have such powers:
“In unusual and exigent circumstances, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, by the affirmative vote of not less than five members, may …,” and then there’s a lot of technical language which essentially means that the Federal Reserve can lend money to “any individual, partnership, or corporation,” as long as certain requirements are met.
Not only have they had this power but the Fed has a history of using the power according to the Federal Reserve Branch of Minneapolis that the media on a whole as disregarded.
What H.R. 4173 does is add the amount of 4 trillion to the section 13(3). Those if favor would say this just gives a cap to the Federal Reserve. Others would say this gives the Federal Reserve a green light to go ahead and spend 4 trillion dollars; Congress just said it was okay. By adding the 4 trillion dollar amount to the bill, it is in effect, a “credit limit” to the Federal Reserves ever growing appetite for more fiat currency. This is akin a mother giving the kid the credit card prior to her trip to the mall asking the young shopper to spend a little bit but don’t max it out. What will happen? The child (Federal Reserve) will come back home filled with shopping bags proclaiming that she (Federal Reserve) didn’t want to spend that much money but the sales (banks) were too good (to big) to pass up (fail). The bailouts aren’t over and H.R. 4173 proves just that.
The ad was paid for by the Committee for Truth in Politics which is a group out of North Carolina formed as a non-profit in September of 2008. The only board member listed is a William W. Peaslee who appears to by an attorney in Cary, N.C. The Committee for Truth in Politics has no web site, phone number, or any other information other than the original incorporation submission..essentially they are dark.
The Committe is represented by a James Bopp who has quite a history already with the Committee for Truth in Politics and other organizations with their previous anti-Obama ads.
Is this ad correct? Technically, then Senator Obama did vote for this, but he retracted his vote immediately afterward. It did appear to be a mistake as Politico reported:
The state Senate floor transcript from the day, March 11th, 1999, includes this from Obama: “For purpose of correction. I pressed the wrong button on that. I wanted to vote Yes.”
Mr. James Bopp also filed a suit against the FEC in October of 2008, in regards to filing a report…at all:
“We believe that the U.S. Constitution protects them from having to file that report,” says Bopp. “The problem is having to file a report at all. To be regulated at all. To be accountable to the government at all.”
On Tuesday, January 26, 2010 James Bopp issued a press release via the James Madison Center for Free Speach:
The James Madison Center for Free Speech is asking the Federal Election Commission to revise its regulations in light of the Jan. 21 landmark Supreme Court decision.
The decision, Citizens United v. FEC, recognizes that federal law banning particular corporate and union spending for political speech is unconstitutional.
The James Madison Center’s rulemaking petition, filed today, asks the FEC to state that it will not enforce the unconstitutional bans against any independent spending for political speech, including independent expenditures and electioneering communications. The petition also asks the FEC to:
- Repeal FEC regulations insofar as they implement the bans Citizens United struck down.
- Acknowledge that the unconstitutional law no longer bans corporations, unions, or membership organizations from engaging in independent spending for political speech beyond people such as union members or corporate board members, stockholders, executive personnel, or administrative personnel.
- Repeal the FEC regulations recognizing exceptions to the bans on (1) corporate independent expenditures and (2) corporate and union electioneering communications. The exceptions are no longer necessary, because the bans themselves are unconstitutional.
“This is an election year. Speakers will want to exercise the First Amendment rights to political speech Citizens United recognizes, so the FEC should adopt these regulations quickly, ” said James Bopp, Jr., general counsel for the James Madison Center.
Agree or disagree about the ad, the Committee for Truth and Politics is pushing the FEC and the courts in the proper direction towards free speech and NPR isn’t happy about it at all and seemingly worried about the secret money. In their words:
Bopp may be the nation’s most experienced lawyer in challenging campaign finance laws. For 30 years, he’s been general counsel to the National Right To Life Committee, which has spearheaded opposition to restrictions on political money. He’s also a member of the Republican National Committee and counsel to Focus on the Family and the Indiana Republican Party.
I would expect to see even more ads of this nature in the near future. While some fear corporations and groups being able to purchase these kind of ads, I would argue that aware citizens can judge on their own an ad’s legitimacy and assess the bias of the ad without the government regulating free speech to “protect” us from too much information.
Tags: Bopp > Colorado Freedom > Colorado News/Info > committee for truth in politics > FEC > H.R. 4173 > Reilly > Syndicated
