Federal Reserve 100-Year Charter - Two different views...Submitted by pawnstorm12 on Mon, 03/25/2013 - 08:47
I found two very differing views on whether or not there was a one hundred-year charter on the Federal Reserve System which (if there was), would expire this year (2013) on December 23 unless it was renewed by Congress.
The 1st view is an article which offers some very interesting ideas on how the government is preparing in the event this charter is not renewed.
The 2nd is from a blogger who addresses this question in no uncertain terms that THERE WAS NO CHARTER.
Here then are those two views:
1. BIG BROTHER AMERICA: Government Preparing for the End of the Federal Reserve Charter in 2013.
The Federal Reserve Charter began on December 23, 1913. This charter was good for 100 years, ensuring the Federal Reserve’s control over the United States currency.
Prior to centralized banking, each commercial bank issued their own notes...(Continued here):
2. I found this from a blogger named "Sageandscholar" on the "Yahoo! Answers" site at:
This blogger's response (included in full below), which belittles Ron Paul supporters, was in answer to this question:
What happens when the Federal Reserve charter expires on Christmas eve in 2013?
"There was never a 100 year (or 99 year as some other similar lies state) charter for the Fed.
Yet another absolute myth about the Fed spread by ignorant Paul fans.
It was set up in 1913 with each individual Federal Reserve Bank having a 20 year charter.
However congress passed the Pepper McFadden Bill in 1927 giving the banks perpetual charter. The system can only come to an end as a result of an act of congress.
I am not defending or attacking the fed. Rather I am correcting the misinformation spread by those doing the attacking. As for how the fed was established? The passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. It was established by an act of congress just as the First and Second banks of the United States were.
Yes Sen Aldrich met with some banking executives on Jeckyll Island in 1910. The output of that meeting was the Aldrich Plan. This was presented to the National Monetary Commission and from there to Congress. The House Committee on Banking and Currency then held hearings on the matter for the best part of 1912.
Banking Reform was a major issue in the 1912 election and when the Democrats took the White House and congress the Aldrich Plan was dropped. In it's place Woodrow Wilson along with Sen Owen and Rep Glass put forward the Glass-Owen bill.
This differed from the Aldrich Plan in that it created the Federal Reserve Board as a government entity rather than leaving the money supply entirely in the Private Sector and made Federal Reserve Notes an obligation of the Treasury rather than the private banks.
This bill became the Federal Reserve Act and was debated at length before being passed and signed into law in 1913.
I cannot begin to answer whether the American people in 1913 fully understood the bill (and neither can you) or whether they agreed with it but two pretty important points should be made
1. We are a Republic - we elect congress to pass laws on our behalf and that is exactly what happened. If you want congress to get a headcount approval from the public before enacting any piece of legislation you had better have a look at the entire makeup of our political system
2. To suggest there was some sort of secrecy to this is ridiculous. OK the public and media were not invited to Jekyll Island - but since that plan was rejected it would seem to be rather irrelevant. Banking Reform was a major campaign issue in 1912 and the Federal Reserve Act went through months of congressional hearings. It was a very open process.
As for what you claim to be asking - actually that is the first time you have asked anything of the sort as far as I know. You are welcome to engage in such a debate - I am not necessarily going to disagree that there is some transparency missing.
All I want to do is ensure that debate takes place without being clouded by piles of conspiracy theory nonsense and the usual Federal Reserve myths. Questioning the system is one thing - spreading lies about it is quite another."
I'm not really sure WHICH one of the above views is correct.
Perhaps both contain elements of the truth.
Either way, I'm sure this post will trigger further research and opinions which may clarify the subject.
Or further confuse it...