Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Think4Yourself who wrote (239354)	2/25/2010 10:58:49 AM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

The thing that does make the Fed subject to some level of control by Congress is that every Fed chairman lives in fear of having Congress take away their autonomy. This is what sets them apart from, say, an entity like the Supreme Court, which was set up by Constitution to be independent of both the Administrative and Legislative branches (although we've seen some egregious abuses of the separation of powers in the past 60 years). Created by Congress they can always be dismantled or taken over by the government, just like Frannie and Freddie. Aside from the show they put on for their constituents blaming the Fed for their own failures to maintain fiscal sanity, most in Congress realize that it would be a terrible mistake to make the Fed more subject to political pressure. Unlike what some here think, the primary political pressure would inevitably be more inflationary, not less. One can see that political pressure in the question answer session of the Humphrey Hawkins testimony. All while Greenspan was lowering rates or keeping rates low and then finally raising them, Congress was complaining bitterly to him that rates weren't low enough to relieve the pain in their districts and states. It reminded me of pleas at court, "Sire, my people have no bread."