Saule Omarova says banks sank her chance to become a key regulator

But if governments had that power what might happen?

"This Article... offers a blueprint for a comprehensive restructuring of the central bank balance sheet as the basis for redesigning the core architecture of modern finance. Focusing on the U.S. Federal Reserve System (the Fed), the Article outlines a series of structural reforms that would radically redefine the role of a central bank as the ultimate public platform for generating, modulating, and allocating financial resources in a democratic economy—the People’s Ledger.

On the liability side of the ledger, the Article envisions the complete migration of demand deposit accounts to the Fed’s balance sheet and explores the full range of new, more direct and flexible, monetary policy tools enabled by this shift. On the asset side, it advocates a comprehensive qualitative restructuring of the Fed’s investment portfolio, which would maximize its capacity to channel credit to productive uses in the nation’s economy."

The Wall Street Journal described her as "a one-person systemic risk to the banking system" but directed readers, "Give Ms. Omarova credit for candor," for she was quite honest and open about her intentions in this area.

It is related the praise of lack of pay gap and the suggested changes? The article seems to link both not explicitly but letting the reader to get to that conclusion.

I hope that pay gap between genders is reduced and everybody gets a fair opportunity.

https://www.banking.senate.gov/newsroom/minority/toomey-on-p...

Here's the Independent Community Bankers of America letter, for instance: https://www.icba.org/docs/default-source/icba/advocacy-docum...

Read through the article and you'll see, for example, she wants the NIA to invest in private companies in order to obtain voting rights to control those companies.

The smear of "communism" is a cheap shot that was pretty easy to make because of her background, but frankly her views end up coming pretty close to central planning, and that also makes it easy to accuse someone of being a communist.

Funny, all the "reporting" mentioned here seems to come from NewsCorp properties. And is "reporting" like the above.

I'm not defending her, I'd honestly like to know more. But I'd like to read it from a trustworthy source.

Especially considering how much bullshit redbaiting is going on around this - you get that when they don't have anything better to throw.

Why do you think that might be?

A proposal like hers for a government issued bank account falls right into the federal surveillance state insofar as everyone's finances are concerned.

There's no better way to erode 4th amendment protections for your finances than a federally issued bank account.

It's not an unreasonable slippery slope to imagine that such an account would eventually morph to the point (1) where many or most of your counter parties are using the federal bank account meaning that they know about most of the transactions occurring in private accounts, and (2) where merely using a non federal account they have access to could be maligned as suspicious.

There's no direction these proposals head that don't result in more tyranny from a federal government that we have increasingly less representation and oversight over.

There is a vocal section of the Senate that views experience as a disqualifier. Particularly for finance. This might have been a trial balloon. It might have been part of a broader deal that fell through. It might be a red herring.