Bloomberg: Release Fed Borrowers’ Names
I expect the Fed to lose their Appeal:
“The Federal Reserve should be forced to identify companies that received loans from the central bank because it can’t demonstrate that borrowers would be harmed by the disclosure, according to lawyers who won a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
Total lending by the Fed, which last year began extending credit directly to companies that aren’t banks for the first time since it was created in 1913, was $2.12 trillion on Sept. 30.
Details about the borrowers and their collateral are “central to understanding and assessing the government’s response to the most cataclysmic financial crisis in America since the Great Depression,” attorneys for Bloomberg said in the suit.
The Freedom of Information Act obliges federal agencies to make government documents available to the press and public. The Bloomberg suit didn’t seek money damages.”
>
Source:
Fed Should Release Borrowers’ Names, Bloomberg Says
Mark Pittman
Bloomberg, Oct. 5 2009
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aPXkf9Z0xZ4A
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
October 5th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Pretty correct. Pretty sad.
I am reminded of a friend being in a coffee shop behind someone ordering a decaf latte, with no sugar and cream substitute. To which he responded: “Why bother?”. Correct.
Vote ‘em out. Turn the pump and cycle them through.
Remember the notion of “term limits”?
Kind of like the Dems are going to rescue us. Right. In your dreams.
October 5th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
How can FOIA apply to the Fed when they’re not a federal agency? I mean, they have a big marble building in Washington DC and the president appoints the chairman of the Fed, but they’re not a government agency. My sense is Bloomberg is going to lose this lawsuit if not for any other reason than there’s no standing based only on FOIA.
October 5th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
If we find out that the Fed’s assets are worth a lot less than what they paid for them, a “mark-to-market” accounting philosophy would dictate that the amount of money which represents the difference between what they paid and what they’re currently worth should be added to the Federal budget deficit.
October 5th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
GE better start taking bids for NBCU real quick.
October 5th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Mr. Bernanke, tear down this wall!
October 5th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Transparency. Open government. New tone.
How many times will voters fall for that? Oh, wait. They have no choice. All the experts agree that a third party would be a bad thing.
Oh well.
October 5th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
I hope you are right, BR. This charade must end.
October 6th, 2009 at 12:48 am
I doubt that they will play the “appeal to the Supreme Court” card, as it seems likely that the Court would side with all the previous verdicts.
Instead, I expect some sort or Presidential finding that says the inner workings of the Federal Reserve must be kept private in order to preserve the “national security” of the United States. Such a capability is, I believe, part and parcel of the oxymoronic Patriot Act, and would trump the Freedom of Information Act.
Yes, there would be a bit of carnage in the markets, but nothing that the folks that run the markets can’t handle (especially as they account for a large (the largest?) chunk of the trading). And the trouble from that would be less than what would transpire if it was uncovered who got the $2+T and what the Fed took as collateral. My guess is that over half went to no more than 3 firms.
It’s easy to come up with this — just ask yourself: “What would Dubya do?”
October 6th, 2009 at 1:19 am
Let’s vote in the right politicians. Like in Brewster’s Millions: Vote None Of The Above
http://dubyad40.com/images/blogimages/brewster2.jpg
October 6th, 2009 at 8:21 am
Don’t we already know who took the money? Something tells me that Dollar Tree or Beazer isn’t involved.
But then again, I’m not one of those snazzy economists, so what do I know…
October 6th, 2009 at 9:32 am
The truth will set you free.
October 6th, 2009 at 9:36 am
Uncle Ben just wants to delay the release as long as possible hoping that things will kind of work themselves out and make the revelations moot.
They stonewalled Congress before they revealed that the AIG bailout was a conduit for payments to first and foremost GS and then a bunch of foreign banks. Since they’re not backing down on this is assume it’s even more shocking & disgusting.
Like Chris Whalen said yesterday on Tom Keene, “we’ll be paying for these bailouts for the rest of the century”
October 6th, 2009 at 9:38 am
These bailouts will get bigger when we have to save C, BAC and WFC when the next wave of foreclosures and dicretionary jingle mail hits in the next few months.
October 6th, 2009 at 9:52 am
Didn’t the Fed move the BS assets to the Treasury to escape the terms of disclosure of the prior suit? Can’t audit whats not on the books anymore.
October 6th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
US Court Grants Fed Stay in Bailout Disclosure Case
Published: Tuesday, 6 Oct 2009 | 10:36 AM ET
By: Reuters
A U.S. appeals court Tuesday granted the Federal Reserve’s request for a stay of a ruling that would have forced the U.S. central bank to release the names of banks that participated in its emergency lending programs.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted the stay of a lower court ruling in August that ordered the release of the data sought by Bloomberg News under a Freedom of Information Act request, according to Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller.
The Fed last week said it was appealing the lower court decision and requested a stay arguing that releasing the information could stigmatize participating financial institutions and threaten to undermine the U.S. economy which is trying to recover from the worst recession since the Great Depression.
The Fed in late 2007 launched programs designed to help financial institutions weather the economic crisis, thaw frozen credit markets and prevent a meltdown of the global financial system.
Arguments before the appeals court in New York are set for Jan. 4, 2010, Miller said..
The case is: Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan), No. 08-9595.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33191867