something starts to happen? the answer is yes, in some regards, addresses miss maloney s question. under a single mandate, focused on the purchase power of the dollar, could the fed intervene? in times of mercy? the answer is yes. they would still be the lender of last resort and provide liquidity to those banks and still have liquidity problem but are solvent and ability to increase or decrease interest rates to tighten or loosen money supply. they would still in a single mandate have the ability to intervene in unusual and exigent situations. what they would not be allowed to do, continue to intervene far beyond that financial crisis again contributing to the uncertainty today. it would seem that looking at the last 20, 30 years, their ability to impact our economy is greatly exaggerated on both ends. it would seem to me they can nibble around the edges on these but if they actually had the ability to control unemployment we wouldn t have the situation we have today. if
decisions. with there being open seats, half the vote is cast by people and we did a check, who are the members of the boards. it s a kind of closed system. the board members are selected with great input from the president. they in turn pick the regional president and it is private sector governance of an perhaps part of what we do. i am not talking about what they do in their regions and academic activity. the bill says they should not vote on monetary policy. i just don t understand what the rationale is for letting private sector people with the financial industry generally not in every case, be the predominant influence pick the people who come to washington and vote on one of the most important governmental policies, the whole premise of what we talk about. congressman frank. yeah. i have information that suggests on the board, if i look by profession. the regional boards. one person from labor, you have four academic, 41 people from banks and 47 people from f