Fed needs better PR on last-resort lending, too

December 7, 2011

By Agnes T. Crane
The author is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.

The U.S. Federal Reserve is working to improve its monetary policy communications. But its key role as a crisis lender is also now in the spotlight. Ben Bernanke’s Fed would get less flak if it managed this message better as well.

On monetary policy, the U.S. central bank has pledged to keep interest rates near zero for at least two years and is taking big policy steps aimed at getting the economy off the floor. The Fed’s public relations strategy has developed accordingly, with Bernanke now hosting press conferences after some interest rate decisions. Next year, the central bank is expected to reveal more about how it approaches its double-headed mandate to keep both inflation and unemployment down.

But the Fed also serves as the lender of last resort for the U.S. banking system – and, most recently, as the wingman for the European Central Bank and other monetary authorities when the dollar is in short supply in their jurisdictions. It’s a crucial role that keeps money flowing when the system would otherwise seize up.

Yet it took a court order in support of an effort pioneered by Bloomberg to get the Fed to divulge details of the emergency lending it conducted during the 2008 crisis. Even then, Bernanke left it up to the press and the public to interpret the data it eventually dumped.

A figure of $1.5 trillion actually measures the peak of Fed lending in December 2008. That’s hardly small change, but Bloomberg calculated a much higher total – $7.77 trillion – based on the aggregate of all the lending limits and guarantees the Fed provided during the financial crisis, many of which were only partly used. Other news outlets ran with the larger number, sometimes misrepresenting it as the cash actually lent out by the Fed. That would be a full order of magnitude more than the controversial $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, which had required congressional approval.

The misunderstanding and the subsequent back-and-forth have left Bernanke on the defensive. Yet an independent central bank that can act as a lender of last resort when liquidity dries up is a vital safety net. The Fed needn’t be shy about making that case.

One comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

The war to preserve freedom somewhere in the world as a refuge from tyranny has been fought here against progressivism for 100 years. Progressives applauded the wonders of Soviet Russia under Stalin’s leadership, praised Mussolini, and named Adolph Hitler ‘Man of the Year” in 1938. The primary tool of progressivism is consolidation of the 3 fundamental authorities of government: lawmaking (legislative), executive (administrative), and judicial (dispute resolution). Administrative agencies are the engine that drives a wedge between governance and the People.

Article 1 of the US Constitution clearly states that THE (exclusive) legislative authority at the federal level, i.e. the power to make law, vests in Congress and NOT in the people who populate it. Legislators lack the power to transfer any portion of that lawmaking authority from the institution of Congress, although that is precisely the bluff that has derailed the United States’ republic for 100 years. All law-making power is supposed to be directly accountable to the people through elections, but none of us have ever cast a single ballot to elect the administrator of EPA, for instance. Furthermore, every regulation accomplishes only 1 thing: it creates a bully means–that masquerades as legitimate legal authority–for unelected bureaucrats to steal money from the target of the regulation. Across the country, we, and particularly business owners, must realize that regulation is NOT law.

Understand that Congress has nothing to do with regulation. Congress makes laws by passing bills, and the president may either sign those bills passed by Congress, thus converting the bills into laws, or veto any bill. Regulation, on the other hand, is written by the myriad administrative agencies which have been created by acts of Congress during the past 100 years (e.g. CFTC, FTC, EPA, OSHA, CPSC, TSA, FAA, FCC, etc.). That’s right–a total and blatant violation of the separation of powers doctrine inherent in the Constitution, i.e. the executive (administrative) branch has NOTHING to do with making laws, but ONLY with enforcing them. Furthermore, all members of the executive branch, whether they be police officers, governors, etc. are citizens of the United States first, and officers of the government second, which means that each of them must determine whether a law passed by the legislature (either Congress or a state legislature) is consistent with the Constitution (US and of the particular state). If not, don’t enforce it. We are ALL stewards of the Constitution first and foremost. Obviously, the same applies to regulation. None should be enforced, because the executive lacks any authority to create law or quasi-law, but it will take diligence and repetition for the truth to take hold.

Posted by RegsarentLaw | Report as abusive