Simon Johnson: Opening Up the Fed – Simon Johnson (NYT’s Economix blog)
February 23, 2012

“The Federal Reserve has great power in modern American society, including the ability to move the economy and, at least indirectly, to create or destroy fortunes. Its powers operate in two ways: through control over monetary policy, meaning interest rates and credit conditions more broadly, and through its influence over how the financial system is regulated generally and how specific large banks are treated. The secrecy of our central bank has long been a source of controversy. In line with changes at central banks in other countries over recent decades, the Fed’s chairman, Ben Bernanke, has pushed for more transparency regarding how individual members of the Federal Open Market Committee view the economy — and thus how they are thinking about the future course of interest rates (and the Fed keeps us posted). This is a commendable change, helping people throughout the economy understand what the Fed is trying to do and why. Under pressure from both left and right — consider the unlikely alliance of Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont and Representative Ron Paul of Texas — the Fed has also, after the fact, disclosed more of its actions during the recent financial crisis. … Just on the Volcker Rule — the provision in Dodd-Frank to limit proprietary trading and other high-risk activities by megabanks — Fed board members and staff members apparently met with JPMorgan Chase 16 times, Bank of America 10 times, Goldman Sachs nine times, Barclays seven times and Morgan Stanley seven times (as depicted in a chart that accompanies the Wall Street Journal article). How many meetings does a single company need on one specific issue? How many would you get? For example, Americans for Financial Reform, an organization that describes itself as ‘fighting for a banking and financial system based on accountability, fairness and security,’ met with senior Federal Reserve officials only three times on the Volcker Rule. (Disclosure: I have appeared at public events organized by Americans for Financial Reform, but they have never paid me any money. I agree with many of its policy positions, but I have not been involved in any of their meetings with regulators.) Americans for Financial Reform works hard for its cause, and it produced a strong letter on the Volcker Rule — as did others, including Better Markets and Anat Admati’s group based at Stanford University. Based on what is in the public domain on the Fed’s Web site, my assessment is that people opposed to sensible financial reform — including but not limited to the Volcker Rule — have had much more access to top Federal Reserve officials than people who support such reforms. More generally, it looks to me as though, even by the most generous (to the Fed) account, meetings with opponents of reform outnumber meetings with supporters of reform about 10 to 1. According to those records, for example, the Admati group has not yet managed to obtain a single meeting with top Fed officials on any issue, despite the fact that the group’s members are top experts whose input is welcomed at other leading central banks. To my definite knowledge, they have tried hard to engage with people throughout the Federal Reserve System; some regional Feds are receptive, but the board has not been – either at the governor or staff level.” Click here for more.