Hidden in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

[QUESTINY]

Hidden in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

Posted October 2nd, 2008 by OFallonBrent

In yesterday’s Senate bailout bill, also known as the ‘‘Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008’’ is the following, seemingly innocent section.
SEC. 128. ACCELERATION OF EFFECTIVE DATE.
Section 203 of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 (12 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2011’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2008’’.
So they moved the date of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 up by 3 years. Big deal you say, and what the heck is the FSRRA of 2006? It was a series of amendments to 12 U.S.C. 461 of course! Well, okay, I don’t expect you to know what that is, so here it is (and the other related documents).
The bailout bill - http://money.cnn.com/2008...
Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 - http://www.govtrack.us/co...
12 U.S.C. 461 - http://www.law.cornell.ed...
You may want to open those in new tabs, we’ll be bouncing around them a bit.
Okay, lets follow the trail.
They changed the effective date from 2011 to yesterday!
The Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 made changes to the United States Code TITLE 12 - BANKS AND BANKING, CHAPTER 3 - FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, SUBCHAPTER XIV - BANK RESERVES.
The changes do a few things, none of which seem to be good for us citizens.
The changes eliminated the requirement for banks to keep reserves of cash on hand to cover deposits, they abolished the Federal Reserve’s Earnings Participation Account, they granted the ability for the Fed to create their own rules for distributing their earnings, and they granted the ability to make payments to foreign banks.
These things were not scheduled to go into effect for 3 more years. Unclear is why they needed these changes at all, the other is why they need them now.
Okay, there it is, the conclusion. You can take my word for it and stop now and have some disgust at the whole thing, or you can continue on and get really mad about how convoluted and cryptic things in Washington are.
Fair warning. Continue at your own risk.
Still here? You really are brave. Actually you probably have no idea the mess you are in for. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
Okay, I gave you the conclusion, now here is how to get there. I’ll go fast now, try to keep up, it gets complicated.
‘‘Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008’’
SEC. 128. ACCELERATION OF EFFECTIVE DATE.
Section 203 of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 (12 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2011’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2008’’.
Okay, we know the date has moved. Let’s look at what moved.
Section 203 is a part of the following Title. It states when the entire title goes into effect. So they made the entire Title go into effect yesterday.
TITLE II--MONETARY POLICY PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE FEDERAL RESERVE TO PAY INTEREST ON RESERVES.
(a) In General- Section 19(b) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(12) EARNINGS ON BALANCES-
`(A) IN GENERAL- Balances maintained at a Federal Reserve bank by or on behalf of a depository institution may receive earnings to be paid by the Federal Reserve bank at least once each calendar quarter, at a rate or rates not to exceed the general level of short-term interest rates.
`(B) REGULATIONS RELATING TO PAYMENTS AND DISTRIBUTIONS- The Board may prescribe regulations concerning--
`(i) the payment of earnings in accordance with this paragraph;
`(ii) the distribution of such earnings to the depository institutions which maintain balances at such banks, or on whose behalf such balances are maintained; and
`(iii) the responsibilities of depository institutions, Federal Home Loan Banks, and the National Credit Union Administration Central Liquidity Facility with respect to the crediting and distribution of earnings attributable to balances maintained, in accordance with subsection (c)(1)(A), in a Federal Reserve bank by any such entity on behalf of depository institutions.
`(C) DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS DEFINED- For purposes of this paragraph, the term `depository institution', in addition to the institutions described in paragraph (1)(A), includes any trust company, corporation organized under section 25A or having an agreement with the Board under section 25, or any branch or agency of a foreign bank (as defined in section 1(b) of the International Banking Act of 197.'.
(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(4)--
(A) by striking subparagraph (C); and
(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) and (E) as subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and
(2) in subsection (c)(1)(A), by striking `subsection (b)(4)(C)' and inserting `subsection (b)'.
SEC. 202. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY FOR THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD TO ESTABLISH RESERVE REQUIREMENTS.
Section 19(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking `the ratio of 3 per centum' and inserting `a ratio of not greater than 3 percent (and which may be zero)'; and
(2) in clause (ii), by striking `and not less than 8 per centum,' and inserting `(and which may be zero),'.
SEC. 203. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this title shall take effect October 1, 2011.
Okay, so we can see here that 201 and 202 amend 12 U.S.C. 461. If we take 12 U.S.C. 461 section 19 (b) in the order of the amendments, the first is Section 19(b)(2)(A).
(2) (A) Each depository institution shall maintain reserves against its transaction accounts as the Board may prescribe by regulation solely for the purpose of implementing monetary policy—
(i) in the ratio of 3 per centum for that portion of its total transaction accounts of $25,000,000 or less, subject to subparagraph (C); and
(ii) in the ratio of 12 per centum, or in such other ratio as the Board may prescribe not greater than 14 per centum and not less than 8 per centum, for that portion of its total transaction accounts in excess of $25,000,000, subject to subparagraph (C).
this section is amended—
(1) in subsection (b)(2)(A), by striking “the ratio of 3 per centum” and inserting “a ratio of not greater than 3 percent (and which may be zero)” in clause (i) and by striking “and not less than 8 per centum,” and inserting “(and which may be zero),” in clause (ii);
Notice the change from a set percentage to a percentage “not greater than” and “which may be zero”. So depository institutions no longer have to maintain reserves against their transaction accounts. What is a depository institution? What is a transaction account?
(1) The following definitions and rules apply to this subsection, subsection (c) of this section, and
sections 248–1, 248a, 342, 360, and 412 of this title:
(A) The term “depository institution” means—
(i) any insured bank as defined in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act [12 U.S.C. 1813] or any bank which is eligible to make application to become an insured bank under section 5 of such Act [12 U.S.C. 1815];
(ii) any mutual savings bank as defined in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act or any bank which is eligible to make application to become an insured bank under section 5 of such Act;
(iii) any savings bank as defined in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act or any bank which is eligible to make application to become an insured bank under section 5 of such Act;
(iv) any insured credit union as defined in section 1752 of this title or any credit union which is eligible to make application to become an insured credit union pursuant to section 1781 of this title;
(v) any member as defined in section 1422 of this title;
(vi) any savings association (as defined in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
[12 U.S.C. 1813]) which is an insured depository institution (as defined in such Act [12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.]) or is eligible to apply to become an insured depository institution under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act; and (vii) for the purpose of sections 248–1, 342 to 347, 347c, 347d, and 372 of this title any association or entity which is wholly owned by or which consists only of institutions
referred to in clauses (i) through (vi).
So pretty much any place that handles deposits, most people just call them banks.
(C) The term “transaction account” means a deposit or account on which the depositor or account holder is permitted to make withdrawals by negotiable or transferable instrument, payment orders of withdrawal, telephone transfers, or other similar items for the purpose of making payments or transfers to third persons or others. Such term includes demand deposits, negotiable order of withdrawal accounts, savings deposits subject to automatic transfers, and share draft accounts.
This basically means bank accounts.
So there it is, banks no longer have to keep even a small amount of peoples bank accounts available as cash. They don’t have to fail, they can just say they are out of cash today. Your money is still there, FDIC does not kick in, but they just stop giving out money.
Okay, what else does the date change put into effect 3 years early?
(2) in subsection (b)(4), by striking subparagraph (C) and redesignating subparagraphs (D) and (E) as subparagraphs
(C) and (D), respectively
What was subparagraph (C)? In order to understand subparagraph (C) we need to see the whole paragraph (4).
(4) (A) The Board may, upon the affirmative vote of not less than 5 members, impose a supplemental reserve requirement on every depository institution of not more than 4 percentum of its total transaction accounts. Such supplemental reserve requirement may be imposed only if—
(i) the sole purpose of such requirement is to increase the amount of reserves maintained to a level essential for the conduct of monetary policy;
(ii) such requirement is not imposed for the purpose of reducing the cost burdens resulting from the imposition of the reserve requirements pursuant to paragraph (2);
(iii) such requirement is not imposed for the purpose of increasing the amount of balances needed for clearing purposes; and
(iv) on the date on which the supplemental reserve requirement is imposed, except as provided in paragraph (11), the total amount of reserves required pursuant to paragraph
(2) is not less than the amount of reserves that would be required if the initial ratios specified in paragraph (2) were in effect.
(B) The Board may require the supplemental reserve authorized under subparagraph (A) only after consultation with the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the National Credit Union Administration Board. The Board shall promptly transmit to the Congress a report with respect to any exercise
of its authority to require supplemental reserves under subparagraph (A) and such report shall state the basis for the determination to exercise such authority.
(C) The supplemental reserve authorized under subparagraph (A) shall be maintained by the Federal Reserve banks in an Earnings Participation Account. Except as provided in subsection (c)(1)(A)(ii) of this section, such Earnings Participation Account shall receive earnings to be paid by the Federal Reserve banks during each calendar quarter at a rate not more than the rate earned on the securities portfolio of the Federal Reserve System during the previous calendar quarter. The Board may prescribe rules and regulations concerning the payment of earnings on Earnings Participation Accounts by Federal Reserve banks under this paragraph.
(D) If a supplemental reserve under subparagraph (A) has been required of depository institutions for a period of one year or more, the Board shall review and determine the need for continued maintenance of supplemental reserves and shall transmit annual reports to the Congress regarding the need, if any, for continuing the supplemental reserve.
(E) Any supplemental reserve imposed under subparagraph (A) shall terminate at the close of the first 90-day period after such requirement is imposed during which the average amount of reserves required under paragraph (2) are less than the amount of reserves which would be required during such period if the initial ratios specified in paragraph (2) were in effect.
So they make every bank pay into a reserve fund. It is maintained in an Earnings Participation Account. By deleting subparagraph (C) they abolished that account. They no longer have to maintain the account or pay the earnings. They can still impose a supplemental reserve requirement, they just don’t have to pay any earnings. I wonder what happened to the funds in that account. Remember, this went into effect yesterday.
Okay, what’s next? Ah yes, they added a whole new paragraph 12!
“(12) Earnings on balances.—
“(A) In general.—Balances maintained at a Federal Reserve bank by or on behalf of a depository institution may receive earnings to be paid by the Federal Reserve bank at least once each calendar quarter, at a rate or rates not to exceed the general level of short-term interest rates.
“(B) Regulations relating to payments and distributions.—The Board may prescribe regulations concerning—
“(i) the payment of earnings in accordance with this paragraph;
“(ii) the distribution of such earnings to the depository institutions which maintain balances at such banks, or on whose
behalf such balances are maintained; and
“(iii) the responsibilities of depository institutions, Federal Home Loan Banks, and the National Credit Union Administration Central Liquidity Facility with respect to the crediting and distribution of earnings attributable to balances maintained, in accordance with subsection (c)(1)(A), in a Federal Reserve bank by any such entity on behalf of depository institutions.
“(C) Depository institutions defined.—For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘depository institution’, in addition to
the institutions described in paragraph (1)(A), includes any trust company, corporation organized under section 25A
[12 U.S.C. 611 et seq.] or having an agreement with the Board under section 25 [12 U.S.C. 601 et seq.], or any branch
or agency of a foreign bank (as defined in section 3101 of this title).”;
(4) in subsection (c)(1)(A), by striking “subsection (b)(4)(C)” and inserting “subsection (b)”.
So paragraph 12 deals with earnings on balances. So basically any money the Federal Reserve bank has from other banks can make earnings and the Fed can decide how and if those earnings are paid out.
Remember the definition of depository institutions? Of course you do, but we have an additional definition just for this paragraph, everything you already know with the addition of foreign banks. So what you ask, if they deposit money in the Fed bank, shouldn’t they make money. Well, maybe, but yesterday they did not.
Remember, this entire paragraph 12 was not supposed to go into effect until 2011.
Foreign banks were not in the definition of depository institutions until they changed the effective date from October1, 2011 to October 1, 2008.
If we rewrite the opening of the paragraph to use the words “foreign banks” it reads
Balances maintained at a Federal Reserve bank by or on behalf of a foreign banks may receive earnings to be paid by the Federal Reserve bank at least once each calendar quarter, at a rate or rates not to exceed the general level of short-term interest rates.
So, to summarize, by changing the effective date the following is now in effect.
Banks don’t have to have cash on hand.
The Fed does not have to maintain an Earnings Protection account for the supplemental reserve fees they charge banks which means they don’t have to give any of the money back to those banks.
They now include foreign banks as institutions they can pay earnings to. Let’s not forget, earnings is really just more American debt. Federal Reserve Notes are really debt, but that’s a topic for another monster blog entry.
Anyway, all of this from one puny and innocuous section in the ‘‘Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008’’.
If you read this whole thing you deserve a gold star, or at least an attaboy.
Attaboy!

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/66109

[Shechaiyah]

They have a reason why they're setting it all up to implode.

What do you think that reason is?

(I have my own speculative reasons;

that's why I'm deep into NASA databases.)


Shech--

[Zarathustra]

Q,

I commented on that in another thread. That, too me, is setting up the largest bank run in the history of mankind. Amazing that they approach a problem that involves overleveraged banks, and allow them to have a 0% reserve rate!

[Love/Light 13]

Yeah, I don't believe the Bushie's, etc. are trying to set up this bill for failure at all. On the contrary they are praying the bill gets passed, otherwise the neo-con NWO faction is in BIG trouble. Can anyone say AUDIT TIME??

This bill can't pass, can it? I mean how can a guy like John McCain, who railed against pork-barrel spending and earmarks for years, support this christmas-tree of a bailout bill? $472 million to Hollywood producers?!?!?! This nation has lost its cotton-pickin' mind!

**********************

may WISDOM guide COMPASSION

"out of MANY, we are ONE"

[TAXMASTER]

more of the senators are exposed to those that are the archetechs of the NWO so they go along with the good ol'e boys because most have ambitions for a higher office. the congress is closer to the average guy and thinks more like we do and that is why the vote went the way it did for both. you can bet your wooden nickels that the swing votes have been worked on by the advocates and have been promised a bunch of goodies for their district.

Namaste'

[QUESTINY]

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

Q,

I commented on that in another thread. That, too me, is setting up the largest bank run in the history of mankind. Amazing that they approach a problem that involves overleveraged banks, and allow them to have a 0% reserve rate!

I did not know this was posted in another thread...sorry about the duplication

[Zarathustra]

Originally Posted by QUESTINY

I did not know this was posted in another thread...sorry about the duplication

Q,

No duplication, the thread was started on another subject, I just brought up that very thing. It deserves the attention of your thread, in my opinion.

Z

[Jenny]

I agree this issue deserves a thread for it's own.

The scam goes still deeper and is so well conceived and well prepared.

Intelligence used to destroy instead of build for the good of us all.

Jenny

[Shechaiyah]

I want to throw something out into the ring here: an idea.

WHAT IF the liquidation of banking assets has something to do with Nibiru or ETs?

WHAT IF the war we're in is what Reagan referred to as "Star Wars"?

WHAT THEN? How would that affect your judgments about what's going on in banking and globalist consolidation of rulership?


Just wondered.

Shech--

[Rocky_Shorz]

Bank Holiday

LONDON (MarketWatch) -- If President Bush can't get Congress to do what he says is needed to save the U.S. economy, perhaps he should consider borrowing a page from Franklin Delano Roosevelt's playbook.

Seventy-five years ago, in his first full day on the job, President Roosevelt famously closed the nation's banks and kept them closed until Congress passed emergency legislation to give his administration tools to deal with a string of bank failures.

The shocking move was, in retrospect, widely viewed as a success -- given that it halted the runs and restored confidence and got credit flowing again in an admittedly anemic economy.
While it may seem fanciful to consider shutting the economy down for a few days, the parallels with the current crisis are striking enough to suggest that similar draconian action may be needed.
After all, consider the following:

*
The House of Representatives has failed to pass legislation that, for better or worse, is allegedly needed to restart the credit markets;
*
The bill's failure has had the effect of locking up the interbank lending that is crucial to the functioning of the real economy;
*
The stock markets are seeing enormous swings in volatility, only adding to fears among ordinary people about the stability of the economy, their portfolios and their savings;
*
Bush's point man for the crisis, Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, is running on fumes. The guy can't have had a decent night's sleep in months and his judgment has to be clouded at times.

Whatever his standing in the polls, Bush has declared repeatedly that the U.S. economy is on the brink of a catastrophic downturn. So rather than stand by and watch that happen, he could go imperial and shut everything down.

There are circuit breakers on the stock markets, you know. There are daily trading limits on commodities contracts. Why not step in and give everybody a chance to chill out until the goats on Capitol Hill finish bleating at each other and pass something?

[Love/Light 13]

Scech-

this financial meltdown is obviously a creation of the global elite. While the battle may have some "ET" related issues, in reality the outcome hinges on the personal soul-searching each and every entity on earth is doing RIGHT NOW. Our future timeline will be a positive one if and when the human species on this planet is ready to grow up, and experience the responsibility and the unending love radiating within the 4th and 5th density of our universe(s).

whether we are ready or not for that positive transformation is yet to be determined.

******************************

may WIDSOM guide COMPASSION

"out of MANY, we are ONE"

[Zarathustra]

R,

Valid thoughts. I think that with the 65 trillion to over a quadrillion derivitave bomb (see Chapman's latest commentary amongst others) they are aware that nothing can stop the collapse. It is literally a 'when' not an 'if'. All of the world's wealth in currency is insufficient to cover that market. I think that one of the goals (the others potentially insidious) is to have the collapse happen on Obama's watch, and I think they are panicked that they may not be able to accomplish that. Thus the troops being returned from Iraq and undergoing "domestic mission training". A bank shutdown, or "holiday", is likely I believe.

But what people must understand is that all of these moves are not attempts to save us, rather holding off the wave until the looting is complete. Bush, Paulson, Bernanke, and the other criminals have knowingly allowed and or created this mess, and compassion for us is not in the mixture.

It is a falsity to compare this time with The Great Depression (which the bulk of economists now say was intensified and prolonged by Roosevelt's interventions), or any other economic problem that we have gone through. Those were riptide currents and large waves of varying strength compared to the mega tsunami that is racing towards us at 700 miles an hour.
2 big differences
1) Then the dollar was not already inflated to near extinction
2) We had a manufacturing/agricultural based, not a service/financial based economy to return to

Abolish the Fed, print no more currency, return the currency to a metals based standard, abolish the IRS, cut the Federal gov. by 70%, downsize the military by 70%, end all wars, make payment deals with the world for our debt, immediately repeal NAFT and GATT, immediately invest in manufacturing -

and we might have a shot.

Continue to print fiat currency with printers that work at seemingly light speed, continue to pump air into a toxic bubble of unsustainable price levels, continue to sell the wealth of America to the Fed, the international banking consortium, and foreign nations

and the end is near.

[Rocky_Shorz]

so what would the elite gain by allowing a complete global financial collapse, their only power is money?

Is this the fall of the Illuminati right before our eyes?

Who will gain most by the collapse if the whole wheel needs to be recreated?

[Sol Invictus]

This is it folks. Make sure you watch and listen to this entire interview. This is as raw as it will get, as clear a warning as you will ever hear.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA


No more cash, no more gold, no more cash in hand... your going to be chipped and fleeced like sheep.


Believe it I have been watching this for years and years, and now its coming to pass.

'You become a serf, a slave'.

[Rocky_Shorz]

Originally Posted by Sol Invictus

'You become a serf, a slave'.

For a majority of the world that lives from paycheck to paycheck for those lucky enough to work, what difference will it make?

The Middle class has been sucked dry most because of debt are poorer than the poor...

so for most, there isn't very far to fall, but what about all the millionaires and billionaires that are standing at the edge of the cliff?

[Shechaiyah]

Globalism is sucking us dry; and the people who are doing it know they are doing it; and there must be a reason why they are doing it.

I say, again: look to the stars. If the 2012 calamity is total, or if "Star Wars" is real, then the strategy may not be so crazy, at all.

But they don't tell us. They don't tell us their intentions; they don't share their methods. They trick us, deceive us, lie to us, equivocate and obfuscate.

That being so, we must prepare our own futures and pray for our own Deliverance; or else, the program's pre-planned outcomes are what we will be subject TO.

Time to drop out and pull together, methinks.


Shech--

[conniec818]

greetings...
in my opinion they want a global crash so that bush can implement an economic emergency....along with martial law...the rest of the world would follow suit...

[Shechaiyah]

Well, if you don't think that that is appropriate, maybe you and I and a few others ought to pull together and come up with some sort of cooperative idea; some sort of condo arrangement; some sort of path to survival that doesn't involve slavery to the Bush Cabal.

How about that idea?


Shech--