According to Bloomberg News, the House Financial Services Committee today, in a 43-26 vote and a second voice vote, attached a Fed-audit amendment to legislation creating a council of regulators to monitor systemic risk.

According to Dr. Paul, the bill, HR 3996, if passed, will grant sweeping new powers to the Federal Reserve. However, at least with his amendment attached, it won’t be acting in secret anymore.

The panel’s vote increases the possibility that Congress will reverse the ban on audits of interest-rate decisions. The broader bill on financial regulation is subject to a vote by the committee, then must be approved by the House and Senate and signed into law by President Obama.

The effort to audit the Federal Reserve was spearheaded by the Campaign for Liberty, but many RLC members have participated in letter writing campaigns and in-person protests in support of the bill (HR 1207).  In September, the California GOP adopted a resolution by RLC members to support HR 1207.

The bill has over 300 co-sponsors in the House and over 30 co-sponsors in the Senate.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of California successfully held its second annual convention meeting of 2009 in conjunction with the California Republican Party Convention. The CRP Convention was held the weekend of September 25-27, which provided the RLCCA with a unique opportunity to hold a Convention Meeting and build relationships with fellow California Republicans.

The RLCCA Convention Meeting took place on Saturday, September 26. With several new faces and our growing leadership, comradery and activism filled the room. During the meeting, new By-laws revisions were passed unanimously.

All weekend long, the RLC offered an exhibitor booth along side other volunteer organizations and candidates running for state office. The World’s Smallest Political Quiz was again administered at our table, with the results, as expected, placing the majority of fellow California Republican quiz takers in the libertarian quadrant. New to this years convention was the RLCCA Voter Recommendation Guide. The guide focus was on two proposed state party rules and a resolution. There was no action taken by CRP Delegates on the rules, but the resolution passed!

The California Republican Party voted nearly unanimously in support of HR 1207 and S 604, The Federal Reserve Transparency and Sunshine Acts. The resolution was sponsored by the Alameda County and Sonoma County GOPs, and co-sponsored by the Republican Liberty Caucus of California, RLC-endorsed Congressman Tom McClintock, State Assemblyman and U.S. Senate candidate Chuck DeVore, as well as a number of CRP Delegates.

The California Republican Party supporting an audit of the Federal Reserve was a shining moment for the RLCCA and the Liberty Movement. Chuck DeVore, a tremendous supporter of auditing the Federal Reserve, spoke passionately on behalf of the resolution during the resolution committee meeting. Immediately after Chuck DeVore spoke, the Resolution Committee voted unanimously to send the resolution to the floor of the convention. Thanks Chuck!

All weekend long, members of the Republican Liberty Caucus could be seen at our exhibitor booth, CRP committee meetings, County Chairman and Treasurer meetings, CRP Convention floor, and many other party functions and meetings. We certainly made sure the Liberty Movement was active throughout the weekend. And it paid off with our co-sponsored resolution passing overwhelmingly.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of California would like to thank all our members and volunteers who showed up to the convention. We could not have done it without your dedication! We would also like to thank the California Republican Party for holding the Convention and so overwhelmingly supporting the resolution; and U.S. Senate Candidate Chuck DeVore for his support.

2010 elections are right around the corner and the RLC CA is poised to make a difference! If you haven’t yet done so, please join the RLC today!

Some photos from the event follow:

At its Convention on Saturday, the California Republican Party adopted the following resolution:

Whereas, the California Republican Party applauds transparency and accountability in government and rejects government secrecy involving monetary policy that impacts the entire economy; and

Whereas, serious discussions of proposals to oversee and audit the Federal Reserve are long overdue; and

Whereas, the Federal Reserve can enter into agreements with foreign governments and foreign central banks and the United States Congress is prohibited from overseeing these agreements; and

Whereas, the California Republican Party believes agreements made by the Federal Reserve with foreign powers and foreign banking institutions should be subject to Congressional oversight; and

Whereas, the United States Constitution, gives the United States Congress the authority to coin Money and regulate the value thereof and does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank; and

Whereas, auditing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to assert its constitutional authority over monetary policy and help to protect the value of the United States dollar;

Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, that the California Republican Party, in defense of the United States Constitution, STRONGLY URGES the representatives of the 111th United States Congress to support the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009 as set forth in H.R. 1207 and S. 604.

The Alameda and Sonoma County Republican Parties recently submitted a resolution in support of auditing The Federal Reserve to the California Republican Party.  The resolution was introduced by two RLC supporters, Jerry Salcido and Michael Erickson.

In addition, RLC-endorsed Congressman Tom McClintock, Assemblyman and U.S. Senate candidate Chuck DeVore, and Congressional candidates John Dennis, Paul Smith and Jon del Arroz have all thrown their support behind the proposed resolution.  In fact, Chuck Devore even spoke passionately on behalf of the resolution before California GOP delegates.

RLC members — such as Matthew Heath, John Dennis, David Latour, Walter Stanley, and David Ewing — were the primary movers and shakers pushing for resolution adoption. More information on the resolution is available HERE.

Congratulations!

The Republican Liberty Caucus (and its California affiliate) has endorsed Gary Clift for Congress.

Due to incumbent Ellen Tauscher’s resignation as California’s 10th Congressional District Representative, an open primary election will be held on September 1. Mrs. Tauscher was appointed Undersecretary of State for arms control.

According to a press release from the California RLC, “Of the 11 candidates running for the 10th Congressional District, Gary Clift is the right choice for Congress … he stands for individual rights, free enterprise, and limited government.”

Says Mr. Clift,”The financial future of our country is at risk if the federal government follows California’s lead. The federal government has grown too big and expenditures greatly exceed tax revenues. This cannot continue. We need to reduce federal government by cutting the waste and mismanagement. One of my first actions in Congress will be to cosponsor HR 1207, which aims to audit the Federal Reserve and make government transparent with our tax dollars.”

The Clift campaign has requested volunteers for phone banking. Phone bank volunteers do not need to live in California’s 10th Congressional district.

“If we Liberty and Constitutional Republicans truly want to restore our Constitutional Republic, we must stand up and support candidates who will take our cause to the halls of Congress. Gary Clift is just that man. Support your freedoms by supporting Gary Clift,” said Matthew Heath, Chair of the California RLC affiliate.

California Congressional District 10 includes Fairfield (Solano County) in the north, Livermore in the south, ad Walnut Creek on the east. It stretches as far west as the San Pablo Bay and as far northeast as route 5 nearing Sacramento.

___________________________________________________________________

GARY CLIFT PROFILE

AGE: 53
PARTY: Republican
HOMETOWN: Vacaville (home is in a rural area north of town in a small finger of the 10th District.)

EDUCATION: Bachelor of arts in political science and Spanish, University of California at Davis, 1980

BACKGROUND: Grows a variety of organic crops for family and friends. Retired 26-year manager and peace officer with the California Department of Corrections. Lived in numerous countries including Cuba, Ecuador and Iraq as the son of a foreign service officer with the U.S. State Department. Married, father of two children in college.

ISSUES

Health Care:

Wants more transparent discussion of benefits and drawbacks of proposals under discussion, particularly effects on people who like their existing insurance. Believes the federal government cannot manage Health Care: insurance well and it could reduce quality and innovation.

Immigration

As a practical matter, supports a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the country. Supports strict enforcement of existing Immigration laws.

Federal stimulus package

Says it’s too soon to say if it will work, although he would have voted against it. Says business tax cuts are the best way to stimulate the economy.

National Security

Wants all U.S. troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries as soon as practical. Says military occupation foments enemies and does not promote democracy. Supports repeal of the Patriot Act, which gives the government latitude to spy on telecommunications, e-mails and phone calls.

Energy Policy

Supports allowing states to fully develop all sources of domestic energy, including oil drilling and nuclear plants.

Transportation

Wants California congressional delegation to use its clout to end the state’s export of tax dollars to other states and to use the money for local needs.

Gay Rights

Says voters should decide whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. Says the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” military policy is within the authority of President Barack Obama, who has said he will abolish it.

Education

Would abolish the U.S. Department of Education, return its money and education control to states.

Mike Doherty has seemingly done the impossible.

In 2002, he was elected to the New Jersey Assembly. He has never been a party man, but always has been a man of integrity and principle. A West Point graduate who served for eight years in the Army as an artillery officer, Doherty has three sons currently serving in the military.

He has consistently bucked the Republican Party leadership while standing up for his own convictions. For example, in last year’s presidential election he committed what amounted to apostasy in the eyes of both the state and national Republican establishments: Rep. Doherty supported Ron Paul for U.S. President. He even went so far as to give a speech at a rally on Philadelphia’s Independence Mall at which Paul directed a tirade in the direction of the Federal Reserve building nearby.

According to columnist Paul Mulshine, a reporter who frequently covers libertarianism and New Jersey politics, “I first became aware of [Doherty's principles] in 2001 when he was a freeholder. A judge threatened to throw [him] in jail if he wouldn’t change his vote and approve construction of a county college.” Says Mulshine, “Doherty stood up. The judicial system backed down.”

This year, Doherty began his campaign for an open State Senate seat, facing opposition from Republican Marcia Karrow. The RLC endorsed his candidacy. Doherty risked his safe Assembly seat to enter the primary against Karrow.

Ms. Karrow circulated a flyer accusing Doherty of advocating “surrender in Iraq” — most likely because he supported Ron Paul. Says Mulshine, “Karrow decided to make Doherty’s support for Paul a central theme of her campaign. And if Doherty supported Paul, then Doherty supported surrender in Iraq. Or so the logic went.”

Continues Paul Mulshine, “It didn’t go very far. Neither Paul, who is also a veteran, nor Doherty supports surrender in Iraq. They simply support the Constitution, which calls for wars to be declared by Congress and then fought to the quickest conclusion possible. That is a stance popular with many military men.”

Doherty defeated Karrow in the primary. Doherty now becomes perhaps the most prominent conservative in the New Jersey Republican Party. Keep your eye on him.

Mulshine says that “Doherty showed an ability to rouse a crowd that is almost entirely lacking among GOP politicians.” He continues, “The reason is not difficult to discern. He actually bases his positions on principles. Among Trenton Republicans, that’s a novel concept. But sooner or later they might be tempted to try it.”

The district Doherty is running in encompasses rural Warren and Hunterdon counties and is safely Republican, making it likely that Mike Doherty will be moving up to the Senate come 2010.

You can learn more about Mike Doherty or donate to his campaign at http://www.mikedohertynj.com/.

From liberals and conservatives, from grassroots activists to lawmakers — the Fed is under attack for its role in aiding Bank of America’s takeover of Merrill Lynch, for which Bank of America received $20 billion in bailout funds. Says The Wall Street Journal:

“House lawmakers aren’t known for bipartisanship, but congressmen from both parties managed to come together from opposite sides at a House Oversight Committee hearing today to besiege Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.”

“The onslaught was near universal, but the attacks came on different flanks. Republicans railed against what they perceived as a government imposing its will on business. Rep. Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) kept bringing up the October 2008 meeting where Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, alongside Bernanke, presented bank CEOs with the TARP capital injections. “Do you see how a reasonable person could reach the conclusion that there, in fact, was this pattern of pressure from the government?”

“Ranking member Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) took a similar attack, after yesterday accusing the Fed of a coverup. He focused on the Bank of America deal with Merrill, indicating that it was reasonable for BofA to back out, and that government pressure pushed it into the deal.”

Politico features an article that refers to RLC Adviser Ron Paul (R-TX) as a trendsetter on the issue. Paul’s bill to mandate the first-ever audit of the Fed suddenly finds itself with 242 co-sponsors.
“Could it be possible that the Fed not only can cause these bubbles, but they’re … acting on their own?” asks Dr. Paul.

Senator Jim Bunning, who faces a tough re-election campaign, has also been a persistent critic of the Fed. “The Federal Reserve has handed out over $2 trillion to various financial institutions with absolutely no accountability for who they are giving to and how much those institutions are getting,” Bunning said. “I have asked repeatedly for an answer to this — but without success. If the Fed is going to print money hand over fist that the United States government can’t afford, I think the taxpayers have a right to know exactly who they are giving this money to and how much. It’s time for the Fed to come clean with the American people.”

In the Senate, Jim DeMint (R-SC) is the lead co-sponsor of HR 1207. He spoke to Glenn Beck about the bill on Tuesday:

Will the Fed have to finally answer to the people?

by William Westmiller

I’m not persuaded that the proposals to audit or abolish the Federal Reserve are properly grounded in reality.

The Founders said very little about the specific powers granted Congress, but they clearly did NOT intend an unlimited power to create and manipulate currency: “… The authority of the existing Congress is restrained to the regulation of coin STRUCK by their own authority, or that of the respective States. It must be seen at once that the proposed uniformity in the VALUE of the current coin might be destroyed by subjecting that of foreign coin to the different regulations of the different States,” according to James Madison in Federalist 42.

In other words, the ONLY “money” they were authorized to create were gold and silver coins. Which is why the power to “coin” was included with the establishment of standard weights and measures. The ONLY “regulation” authorized was to ensure that coins were what the claimed to be (e.g., 1.0 troy ounce of .999 pure gold). The accuracy of value representation was the only thing to be “regulated.” Unfortunately, the clear and obvious meaning (at the time) of those sharply limited powers were not made explicit in the Constitution, although they were implied by the Section 10 ban on states coining money, or accepting anything other than gold or silver coins as legal tender.

So, what happened? For more than a century, all U.S. currency was denominated in gold or silver coin, even if it was a printed depository note for a fixed quantity of precious metals. Over time, the *notes themselves* became “dollars”, with the presumption (correct for a long period) of inherent worth.

Then, on the pretext of “expanding commerce”, Congress authorized more notes to be printed than the actual quantity of silver and gold that they claimed to represent. In other words, Congress decided to lie. The notes were no longer “certificates of demand deposit” for actual gold and silver, but were simple contrivances and fabrications. The actual gold and silver reserves were used to pay foreign debt, but the number of claims on those assets (“dollars”) were never reduced to match the actual reserves. In other words, the politicians decided that they could “create monetary value” out of thin air, or at least cheap paper.

That Congress was perpetrating a fraud on everyone who used the “dollar” – on the presumption of some inherent reserve value of hard assets – became evident when the “price” of gold in dollars (which had been roughly 1/35th an ounce) could no longer be sustained. Foreign governments noted the fraud first and started demanding actual gold for their U.S. paper certificates.

When domestic banks started noticing that redemption, they followed suit. In other words, they “called the bluff” of Congress: the notes being printed did NOT actually correspond with the precious metal assets. Their only protection from congressional profligacy was to actually redeem dollar certificates for actual gold and silver. So, the federal government had no choice but to “free float” the “dollar” relative to gold. They abandoned the implied Constitutional restriction, so that they could “create more monetary value” (and spend it) without actual increasing asset deposits. Thus, inflation was born from the political craving to produce “something from nothing.”

When the inflationary consequences of this fraud became evident in the rising price of gold, legislators all agreed that they simply couldn’t control themselves. So, they handed over their imaginary power to create fiat currency to an independent body of bankers, with instructions to do it right: keep inflation low (“sustainable”) without adversely impacting employment (just enough to maintain the illusion of government’s claimed ability to “create jobs”). Thus, the Federal Reserve was founded, with a mandate to use this fabricated federal power to create “money” from nothing … in a “responsible” way. Of course, that was an impossible assignment.

Which (finally) leads to my concern.

IF the Federal Reserve is abolished and Congress “re-claims” the imaginary power to fabricate “money”, how does that solve any problems? Absent a “reconstruction” of the original intent of Article 8, who do you trust more: Ben Bernanke or Barney Frank? A handful of people who have some interest in a stable money supply (required for the maintenance of any common sense in banking), or a handful of politicians who really believe that government CAN create something from nothing? Shouldn’t the point be that NO politician should have ANY control whatever over the money supply? Short of jailing people who perpetrated monetary fraud (most of whom are long dead), what are the chances that Congress (or the Supreme Court) will actually acknowledge that their SOLE power is to coin true money, denominated in precious metals, that are actually held as reserves against paper depository notes?

IF the Federal Reserve is audited, what will that disclose? It certainly won’t reveal the fundamental fraud which average Americans take for granted (that “dollars” ARE “money”), nor will it encourage any kind of dispassionate analysis of “sustainability” or constraint. It will simply insert Congressional “oversight” and superficial “review” of the banker’s best judgment (judgments they shouldn’t be making in the first place). What will voters “demand” of their legislators: more “money” or less “money”?

Audit or abolish the Federal Reserve and you are almost surely guaranteed to have massive runaway inflation in short order. Maybe a “good thing” for the gold bugs who imagine that the “dollar value” of their assets is anything more than illusion (just like the artificial “growth” in GDP), but it will certainly be a very bad thing for every other American.

Rather than attacking the Federal Reserve “bogeyman”, we should work to educate people about the actual limited constitutional powers that Congress should not be allowed to abridge. That may be more difficult than attacking powerful icons or cloistered financial celebrities, but that is the ONLY real solution.

Mr. Westmiller is the past Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus.

Recently, Newsweek featured a headline claiming that “We Are All Socialists Now.” Perhaps it should have featured a picture of Demetrius Poliorcetes on the cover instead. The history of the ancient Hellenistic cities in what is now Arabia and Turkey might provide more useful knowledge about what is happening in the United States than one can find in newspapers, magazines or on television.

Michael Rostovtzeff was a Ukrainian-born archaeologist and professor of ancient history at Yale beginning in 1925. He died in 1952. He was among the first historians to study the ancient world’s economies and to emphasize the role of capitalism in the rise and decline of ancient societies.

I have just started reading Rostovtzeff’s monumental Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire*, one of a number of massive books that he authored. The text runs to 488 pages but there are in addition more than 200 pages of footnotes. Friends of liberty will do well to consider Rostovtzeff’s work.

He starts the book by discussing the history of Greece and the Hellenistic city states that Greeks founded in what is now Arabia and Turkey. He notes that “class warfare” was common in classical Greece proper. “This class-war made the growth and development of a sound capitalistic system very difficult.” In classical Greece there were widespread movements for redistribution of land and abolition of debts. The problem was so widespread that Athens and Itana in Crete required citizens to swear that they would not put redistribution of land and abolition of debts to the vote. It seems that ACORN has precedents.

Rostovtzeff writes:

“Revolution and reaction followed each other with brief delays, and were marked by wholesale slaughter or expulsion of the best citizens…What was lost by the Greek cities of the European mainland and most of the islands was gained by the Hellenistic monarchies and more especially by the Greek cities of the East.”

Unlike the democracies in Greece proper, the eastern Hellenistic kings of the fourth and third centuries BC were anti-libertarian capitalists, much like more recent rulers of Chile and post-Mao China. “The result was that every attempt at a social revolution within their gates was stopped by the strong hand of the Hellenistic monarchs, and that the cities were very rarely involved in external warfare.”

The kings’ anti-libertarian suppression of revolution had a libertarian effect, at least temporarily. “The accumulation of capital and the introduction of improved methods in trade and industry proceeded more freely and successfully in the East than in the cities of Greece proper. Hence the commercial capitalism of the Greek cities of the fourth century attained an ever higher development, which brought the Hellenistic states very near to the stage of industrial capitalism that characterizes the economic history of Europe in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.”

That is mind blowing. In the fourth and third centuries BC Greeks in Asia Minor were attaining 19th century levels of industrialization? In other words, from the year 300 BC until 1900 virtually no consistent economic progress was made? And how easy might it be to revert to the decline that followed the fall of the Roman Empire roughly 1500 years ago? True, these societies depended on slave labour. But recall that the American economy also so depended until 1862.

Rostovtzeff notes that the Greek cities not only had a large internal market and a large, competitive trade, but also:

“They gradually improved the technique of agricultural and of industrial production with the aid of pure and applied science…and they employed both in agriculture (including cattle-breeding) and in industry the methods of pure capitalistic economy based on slave-labour. They introduced for the first time a mass production of goods for an indefinite market. They developed banking and credit and succeeded in creating not only general rules for maritime commerce…but also a kind of common civil law, which was valid all over the Hellenistic world. The same tendency towards unification may be noticed in attempts to stabilize the currency, or at least to establish stable relations between the coins of the various independent trading states.”

These impressive advances, a globalization that occurred nearly 2,500 years ago, very quickly “stunted” and then was “atrophied” by “constant warfare which raged almost without interruption all over the Hellenistic world.” It didn’t take long for the military-industrial complex to assert itself.  ”The wars forced the Hellenistic states, both great and small, to concentrate their efforts on military preparations, on building up the largest possible armies and navies, on inventing new devices in military engineering, and thus wasting enormous sums of money as, for instance, in the case of the siege of Rhodes by Demetrius Poliorcetes.”

Rostovtzeff notes that this led to:

“Nationalization of both production and exchange, which was carried out in some, at least, of the Hellenistic monarchies, especially Egypt. By nationalization I mean the concentration of the management of the most essential branches of economic activity in the hands of the state, that is to say, of the king and his officials. Profitable at first for the state, this system gradually led to dishonesty and lawlessness on the part of the officials and to the almost complete elimination of competition and of the free play of the individual energy on the part of the population.

“Hand in hand with this tendency towards state control went the minute elaboration of a highly refined system of taxation, which affected every side of economic life. It was based on the experience of the Oriental monarchies, but it went much farther both in inventing new taxable objects and in improving the mode of collecting the taxes. The burden of taxation lay heavily on the population of the Hellenistic world…

“This disastrous economic system of the Hellenistic monarchies produced ever-growing discontent among the masses of the natives. From the end of the third century onwards the native population of Egypt, for example, rose repeatedly against its foreign oppressors…”

Naturally, the warfare and economic dislocations due to taxes and socialism in the Greek world opened the city gates to a rising new republic: Rome. Might the United States’ ever-expanding government spending; subsidization of corrupt and inefficient financial institutions and corporations; and its military-industrial complex open the door to the ascendancy of a new power, this time from the east?

*All quotes in this blog are taken from chapter 1, “Italy and the Civil War”.

Mitchell Langbert can be visited at http://www.mitchell-langbert.blogspot.com.

After many months of hearing about H.R. 1207, Ron Paul’s bid to audit the Federal Reserve, the resolution has finally advanced to a phase where grassroots citizens can have a say on the matter via their member of Congress. That’s because H.R. 1207 is now in the House Financial Services Committee, whose member list is here.

Paul’s legislation, which would reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported. As of this writing, the legislation has 71 co-sponsors, making it perhaps a historical piece of legislation for the oft-lonely Congressman from Texas.

Not surprisingly, nearly all RLC-endorsed candidates in Congress have signed on to co-sponsor this legislation.

Some of the surprises on the list of co-sponsors, at least from my perspective, include Republicans Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Dean Heller (R-NV), Mary Fallin (R-OK), Rodney Alexander (R-LA), and Rob Wittman (R-VA).  Most of the Democrats who have signed on are, in my estimation, often “go at it alone” types such as far-left Peter DeFazio (OR) and Pete Stark (CA) and Blue-Dog Dems. Gene Taylor (MS) and Steve Kagen (WI). A few powerful Democrats have also signed on, such as Lynn Woolsey (CA) and Neil Abercrombie (HI).

For many months now, RLC members across the country have spent quite a bit of time promoting H.R. 1207. For example, in Alameda County (Bay Area) California, where the RLC holds a majority of members on a very large County GOP Executive Committee, a resolution supporting H.R. 1207 passed.

The resolution, championed by California RLC Secretary Walter Stanley and California RLC Board member David LaTour, says, in part, “We applaud transparency and accountability in government and reject government secrecy involving monetary policy that impacts the entire economy.”

A resolution supporting H.R. 1207 also passed in the Sonoma County GOP, thanks to the efforts of California RLC Chair Matthew Heath.

Similar resolutions are being worked on and introduced in other localities throughout the country.

The official Audit the Fed Facebook group has over 3,000 members. Please write the House Financial Services Committee members today and ask them to advance H.R. 1207 to the House floor.

RLC member Phil Pepin of San Antonio, Texas was a guest speaker at the San Antonio Tea Party rally last Wednesday. Mr. Pepin added graphics and pictures of the incredible crowd at the San Antonio Tea Party to his speech, “The War On Economic Freedom.” His speech covers the damage caused by government regulation, corporatism, and the Federal Reserve.