Should Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" be passed?
Debate Rounds (3)
It may well be-- and the beginning of the restoration to Congress of all the Fed's powers. The Fed's powers sticking around without the Fed is worse than having the Fed, only eliminating both at once is beneficial.
" I think you are saying that the Congress will control the Fed if this bill makes it all the way through, but in fact all this bill does is force the Fed to tell the Congress what they have been doing"
You can't simultaneously argue that the bill is a slippery slope and the bill is not a slippery slope. Those are contradictory positions. Either this bill is the beginning of the end for the Fed, or it does nothing but disclose.
Besides, Congress does not institutionally know what questions to ask, and it will doubtless craft them in ways that either do nothing or create political pressure for bad policies (such as-- print more money, the traditional result of political pressure on the Fed.) Ron Paul may know some good questions to ask, but there are hundreds of other Congresscritters.
:Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Federal Reserve independent of the government?
It is independent in policy, its heads are appointed. So long as the powers bound up in the Federal Reserve exist, this is one of the best arrangements we could hope for-- it results in specialized experts running things. Anyone running powers like that will run them badly, but specialized experts will run them less badly than your average legislator.
NextGenerationElephant forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.