Fed Refuses to Release Bank Data, Insists on Secrecy (Update1)

[babylonsister]

'Investing' "our" money, yet we're not allowed to know where it's going? :wtf:



Fed Refuses to Release Bank Data, Insists on Secrecy (Update1)

By Mark Pittman


March 5 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve Board of Governors receives daily reports on loans to banks and securities firms, the institution said in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Bloomberg News.

The Fed refused yesterday to disclose the names of the borrowers and the loans, alleging that it would cast “a stigma” on recipients of more than $1.9 trillion of emergency credit from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.

The bank provides “select members and staff of the Board of Governors with daily and weekly reports” on Primary Dealer Credit Facility borrowing, said Susan E. McLaughlin, a senior vice president in the markets group of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in a deposition. The documents “include the names of the primary dealers that have borrowed from the PDCF, individual loan amounts, composition of securities pledged and rates for specific loans.”

The Board of Governors contends that it’s separate from its member banks, including the Federal Reserve Bank of New York which runs the lending programs. Most documents relevant to the Bloomberg suit are at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which isn’t subject to FOIA law, according to the Fed. The Board of Governors has 231 pages of documents, which it is denying access to under an exemption under trade secrets.

“I would assume that information would be shared by the Fed and the New York Fed,” said U.S. Representative Scott Garrett, a New Jersey Republican. “At some point, the demand for transparency is paramount to any demand that they have for secrecy.”

more...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aG0_2ZIA96TI

[gratuitous]

1. Now, why would there be a "stigma" for the recipients?

Oh that's right. We've been regaled with stories for years from the fat cats and the overrich about how irresponsible poor people are, and how they're sucking the economy dry with their welfare and their demand for a minimum wage and on and on! Those lucky duckies don't know how good they have it.

And now that some really serious money is being disbursed out of the Treasury, it's a "trade secret" to disclose who's getting their coffers replenished and on what terms. Oh, and the poor dears - mere captains of industry - aren't accustomed to having their private finances up for public discussion. Why can't you lot be more understanding of the the plight of the oligarchs? At long last, have you no sense of decency?

[babylonsister]

2. This just infuriates me. I can't even express my rage. nt

[gratuitous]

4. It's difficult

I'd hate to see a replay of the Reign of Terror in late 18th Century France, but I have to say that at this stage of my life I'm becoming more and more acquainted with the hostility toward the ruling class that exploded during the French Revolution.

Maybe it's time to read "A Tale of Two Cities" again. As I recall, Dickens wasn't terribly sympathetic toward the revolutionaries, but it can be useful to have a literary reference or two to call to mind when my own words run out.

[acmavm]

3. We sure wouldn't want anyone getting any bad ideas about the

criminals that brought down the world's economy now, would we???

[Solly Mack]

5. K&R

[Political Heretic]

6. Common Wikileaks! Don't let me down! :D

[peacetalksforall]

7. If I were writing the book, I would cast these receivers of our money

as once-upon-a-time insiders who were to receive a portion of riches of the 'war', but because of George, Dick, and Donalds' betrayal-revenge personalities, they were cut out and have made a case that they should be compensated.

Or the recipients could be the ones who lost all the drugs in those airplanes that went down in Mexico.

And throw in a recipient who paid plenty for one of the looted treasures of the Cradle of Civilizaton and now finds they can't sell it.

So it's not just 'who', it's 'why', also.

I don't know which of the first two would grab my sympathy. The last one makes me grieve just thinking about the stolen treasures. Maybe I should remove this third scenario, it is too tragic that Donald could not manage to protect these treasures and didn't even understand what they were.

[anonymous171]

8. If I was charged with a crime, my name would be released to the public.

But when rich people and their banks commit crimes, suddenly the Government wants to protect their identities as to avoid any kind of stigma that may come from being a FAILED BANK.