Press "Enter" to skip to content

Ron Paul-Alan Grayson bill to audit the Federal Reserve makes headway

The full story is at FireDogLake.

(excerpt from) Ballot Access News
Ron Paul-Alan Grayson Bill to Audit the Federal Reserve Makes Headway

November 19th, 2009

…Ron Paul…has been the leading champion in Congress for ballot access reform for the last ten years. On November 19, the contents of Ron Paul’s HR 1207 were amended into the Financial Regulatory Reform bill of the House Committee on Financial Services. HR 1207 provides that the GAO should audit the Federal Reserve. Paul’s co-author for this bill, Congressman Alan Grayson (D-Florida), is vice-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Paul has been working for an audit of the Federal Reserve for approximately twenty years…


  1. Robert Milnes Robert Milnes November 21, 2009

    “RP wasn’t endorsing a party, but a particular candidate.” I beg your pardon. First of all he’s a REPUBLICAN who ran for president last year. Former LP presidential candidate. Endorsed the CP candidate last year. So he’s about as inconsistent and chameleon-like as you can get. That’s not trustworthy or reliable or anything worthwhile. So who knows whether he was endorsing the candidate and/or the party? Secondly, he’s a diversion of valuable third party/independent time, energy, $ etc. So Shun the SOB, I say.

  2. Robert Milnes Robert Milnes November 21, 2009

    I wouldn’t ask Ron Paul to support my favorite candidate because that would be me. I say shun Ron Paul. That would thwart the skinny little counterrevolutionary fossilized prick.

  3. spinnikerca spinnikerca November 21, 2009

    The problem is where the bill is located — inside a bill that in itself is unacceptable. It will be interesting to see if it plays out, but right now Obama’s whole power grab for the fed and to chop up ‘systemically significant players’ at whim is being held up because Ron Paul’s bill is in it. I see a couple of potential outcomes I like. 1) the Ron Paul amendment causes Obama’s power grab to be rejected, or 2) Ron Paul’s amendment passes so at least within a year we have better evidence of what is going on. (If 2 can happen without passing Obama’s bill, that would be my own preference.)

    As for Ron Paul and supporting him: I do and I will and I don’t really care what someone who wanted him to support THEIR favorite candidate says about it.

    Further, while I agree Chuck Baldwin is no Ron Paul, how can you possibly say Barr was better? RP wasn’t endorsing a party, but a particular candidate.

  4. Third Party Revolution Third Party Revolution November 21, 2009

    I’d say right now that the bill will fail. Even if it passes congress, Obama will veto it.

  5. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi November 21, 2009

    while the Paul/Grayson bill has made impressive progress, I don’t like the odds of its becoming law. The House leadership and most of the Senate are unlikely to sign on.

  6. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi November 21, 2009

    around, yes, I’d agree that Rothbard WAS an inquisitor, but not for “counter-revolutionaries.” His inquisitions mostly involved his seeking out those Ls who didn’t agree with HIS peculiar ideas.

    Hmm, I guess we all do that to some extent, although MNR did it with much rancor.

  7. Robert Milnes Robert Milnes November 21, 2009

    My I.Q. has been tested more than once at around 140. I have been called a troll before. I’m not much of an economist, Marxist or otherwise. But my antennae & radar work pretty good when it comes to progressive/revolutionary v. counterrevolutionary. Whatever reasons Ron Paul has for being ballot access reformist, anti-war, non-interventionist & anti-Fed etc. are counterrevolutionary. I do not trust Ron Paul as far as I can spit.

  8. NewFederalist NewFederalist November 20, 2009

    Milnes is either a brilliant troll or a hardcore Marxist to bitch about Paul being “counter-revolutionary” when he is close to landing a blow on the jaw of the real tyrants that control this county.

    MN Independent… you’re not even close!

  9. Richard Winger Richard Winger November 20, 2009

    Any news story from October 30 is out-of-date. Even the Financial Times of Great Britain is covering this story. I have a link to the Financial Times story of today at Ballot Access News, in the post about Ron Paul’s surprising success with the fed audit bill.

  10. MN Independent MN Independent November 20, 2009

    Holy hell, who cares about Ron Paul’s stance or lack thereof on some piddly libertarian issues? He’s on the eve of jumpstarting the most important legislation this country has seen in a longtime: the bill to expose the criminal banking cartel. Besides, he’s always been one of the friendliest in Congress to third parties. I don’t care if he was a member of the Anti-Third-Party-Satanist Party right now. It’s the bill attacking the Fed that matters.

    Milnes is either a brilliant troll or a hardcore Marxist to bitch about Paul being “counter-revolutionary” when he is close to landing a blow on the jaw of the real tyrants that control this county.

  11. Robert Milnes Robert Milnes November 20, 2009

    aroundtheblockafewtimes, I’m not familiar enough with the Rothbard/counterrevolutionaries situation you describe to answer. However I am convinced Ron Paul lands in the GOP/CP area of reaction/counterrevolution. Evidently his schpiel is so refined he gets a pass by the GOP and the libertarians-except for a few. The tell was his endorsement of Baldwin. The dividing area between counterrevolutionary and revolutionary/progressive is the area between CP and LP. This is why it is so difficult for any CP/LP coalition or fusion. & 2 different parties have evolved. Yet there is a lot of commonality between the LP & GP. So I only know who libertarians should NOT rally around-Ron Paul.

  12. Aroundtheblockafewtimes Aroundtheblockafewtimes November 20, 2009

    Wasn’t Rothbard the chief inquisitor regarding counter-revolutionaries within the libertarian movement? And didn’t Rothbard strongly support Ron Paul? Seems counter-intuitive to me that Paul is a counter-revolutionary. So, Mr. Milnes, whom should libertarians rally around?

  13. Graey Graey November 20, 2009

    If folks would bother to look at news of the bill they would see an Oct. 30 Bloomberg report that the bill was gutted and is useless now. Ron Paul is going to have to try to get the original wording back into it as an amendment. If this is headway then it’s doomed.

  14. Born Again Non-Voter Born Again Non-Voter November 20, 2009

    The Constitution Party is more analogous to Israel than to the Taliban.

    The CP claims to want a western-style Christian democracy; i.e., a democratic “Christian state” that respects the rights of non-Christians.

    Much like Israel claims to be a democratic “Jewish state” that respects the rights of non-Jews.

    Are such things even possible? You tell me.

  15. Robert Milnes Robert Milnes November 20, 2009

    Morgan, to me, Ron Paul has been discredited long ago. But he keeps getting a pass. Because of certain aspects of his positions such as ballot access and anti war. But those positions come with a whole lot more baggage usually associated with the GOP/CP. But he has camoflaged himself with a past association with the LP. He has already damaged any progressive/revolutionary movement in the USA & is in a good position to continue to do so esp. if he runs again in 2012. If fools support him to the tune of 35 million like they did in 2008, it will have a similar effect on the LP race i.e. suck the air out of support & contributions & redistributing it to the GOP. How rightists hate redistribution of wealth yet here is a good example. But it is wealth FROM the anti war people, leftists, progressives & libertarians so it is ok. Well, I say it is not ok. Do not support Ron Paul. Despite his positives he is overall a counterrevolutionary influence. We do not want or need Ron Paul. anti-war rightists should support the LP, NOT Ron Paul.

  16. Robert Milnes Robert Milnes November 20, 2009

    Morgan Brykein, I wrote “roughly similar”. Religious rightists for starters. Taking religious writings literally and fundamentally. & conflating with law-Sharia. Prohibition. And Belief in harsh punishments. etc. Just generally roughly similar.

  17. Morgan Brykein Morgan Brykein November 20, 2009


    How exactly is the CP like the Taliban?

  18. Robert Milnes Robert Milnes November 20, 2009

    Ron Paul MAY be one of the leading ballot access reformists, but even if he is that doesn’t change the evaluation of him as a counterrevolutionary. He is in the same situation as Nader et al in the third party/independent ballot access area. His best fit is with the Constitution Party which is roughly similar to the Taliban. & the CP & GP are about equal in possible maximum support-about 27%. So let us not support Ron Paul or underestimate the damage he could do to progressive/revolutionary movement in the USA.

  19. spinnikerca spinnikerca November 19, 2009

    Actually, it was Ron Paul’s bill and Grayson was one of 309 cosponsors. However, when Watt tried to substitute an audit that would actually LIMIT what Congress can ask for NOW, Ron Paul and Grayson cowrote an amendment to replace it, which Ron Paul introduced.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

10 − one =