Monday, February 14, 2022

The Fed Responds to Report that Fed Chair Powell Traded During FOMC Blackout Periods

 CONSIDER SUBSCRIBING TO THIS NEWSLETTER TO FOLLOW WALL STREET

The Fed Responds to Report that Fed Chair Powell Traded During FOMC Blackout Periods

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: February 11, 2022 ~

Federal Reserve Building, Washington, D.C. with Dead BullA Fed spokesperson has provided Wall Street On Parade with a detailed response to our article yesterday, which documented that trades were made in accounts in which Fed Chair Jerome Powell had a financial interest during a Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting in 2015 and another in 2019. Fed officials are clearly prohibited from trading before and during FOMC meetings because that is when they have insider, market-moving information.

Below is the full statement from the Fed spokesperson. Following the statement, we will explain its many, serious flaws.

“Chair Powell has not traded during FOMC blackout periods. The transactions that were reported occurred in family trusts over which he had no control. Chair Powell is not a trustee and did not direct or control the trades. He relinquished his previous role as a trustee in 2012 when he joined the Federal Reserve as a Board Member.

“These transactions were regular trades for the purposes of the trust, e.g., raising money for donations under the terms of a charitable trust. The trust is legally required to make certain charitable donations every year. In practical terms, this means that transactions must occur in order to free up funds for those donations.

“The trust financial advisor was advised of our blackout periods and was directed to avoid transactions during those blackout periods. Although they were aware of the FOMC blackout dates, the advisor mistakenly made some transactions during some blackout periods. These transactions were reported as part of his publicly available financial disclosures, which have been available regularly every year since he joined the Board. They are available to anyone through the Office of Government Ethics website, OGE.gov.”

Flaw Number 1: The 2015 trades occurred in “Powell Family Trusts” 3 and 4; the 2019 trades occurred in the “Powell Family Trust 3.” Powell’s financial disclosure forms, which he signed, define what has to be reported under “Part 7, Transactions” as follows: “Part 7 discloses purchases, sales, or exchanges of real property or securities in excess of $1,000 made on behalf of the filer, the filer’s spouse or dependent child during the reporting period.” Thus, Powell or someone in his immediate household had an interest in the assets being sold during two separate FOMC meetings. The assets were not held in Blind Trusts, so Powell – who has a law degree – should have been on top of what was happening in these accounts.

Flaw Number 2: Powell signed an Ethics Agreement in 2017 where he agreed to the following:

“If I have a managed account or otherwise use the services of an investment professional during my appointment, I will ensure that the account manager or investment professional obtains my prior approval on a case-by-case basis for the purchase of any assets other than cash, cash equivalents, investment funds that qualify for the exemption at 5 C.F.R. § 2640.201(a), obligations of the United States, or municipal bonds.”

It follows, logically, that Powell would do the same thing for sales transactions, i.e., give his approval on a “case-by-case basis.”

Flaw Number 3: The statement regarding the need to raise cash to fund charitable donations is not convincing. Many wealthy individuals gift appreciated securities to charity, obtaining a tax advantage in doing so. Regardless, in both 2015 and 2019, waiting one extra day to make the trades would have avoided running afoul of the Fed’s prohibition on trading during the blackout period around FOMC meetings.

Flaw Number 4: Powell signs all of his financial disclosure forms, including those for 2015 and 2019. Why didn’t he notice that there were trades listed that occurred on FOMC meeting dates and issue a timely public apology?

Flaw Number 5: According to the Congressional Research Service, this is the prescribed procedure at the Fed that is supposed to prevent the problems outlined above, as well as those of the three Fed officials that have resigned over their own trading scandals since last September:

“Financial disclosure reports from covered officials, including the original entrance reports and the annual reports filed by May 15, are to be reviewed by supervisory ethics personnel to identify potential ethics and conflict problems, and to resolve any conflict of interest issues that may be raised by the ownership of certain assets by a particular public official. Remedial action which may be required by ethics officials to resolve identified conflicts of interest with respect to certain assets may include divestiture, establishment of a qualified blind trust, procurement of conflict of interest waivers, specific written recusal instruments, and requests for voluntary transfer or reassignment.”

It was not an Ethics Officer at the Fed who disclosed to the public the fact that trades in Powell’s accounts occurred on an FOMC meeting date. It was an activist group called Occupy the Fed.

In fact, the General Counsel and Ethics Officer of the Dallas Fed, Sharon Sweeney, allowed Dallas Fed President Robert Kaplan to trade in and out of “over $1 million” S&P 500 futures contracts from 2015 through 2020. These types of contracts can be used to make directional bets on which way the stock market is going to move. They trade during and after the stock markets in the U.S. have closed – almost continuously from Sunday evening to Friday evening. (See our report: Robert Kaplan Was Trading Like a Hedge Fund Kingpin for Five Years while President of the Dallas Fed; a Dozen Legal Safeguards Failed to Stop Him.)

Supervisory ethics personnel at the Fed also did not stop Fed Chair Powell from having upwards of $25 million of his family wealth managed by BlackRock while the firm was given three no-bid contracts by the Fed.

The Fed is not some mom and pop shop in Dubois. It’s the central bank of the United States with a current balance sheet of $8.9 trillion, 98 percent of which American taxpayers are on the hook for. It’s also in charge of supervising the most dangerous megabanks in the United States, which continue to be serially charged with crimes against the investing public while the Fed continues to bail them out.

Do we really want a man at the helm of this sprawling institution who can’t even own up to his failure to police his own trading activities?

LINK




Top News: Climate Crisis Has Made Western US Megadrought Worst in 1,200 Years

 

 
 
The corporate media systematically underplays or outright ignores many of the most serious challenges we face and are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. So, every day, readers all over the world turn to Common Dreams to inform, engage, and ignite change.


February 14, 2022
Top News



Farmer examining dry conditions
Climate Crisis Has Made Western US Megadrought Worst in 1,200 Years
"Climate change is here and now," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal. "If a 1,200 year mega-drought isn't enough to make people realize that, I don't know what is."
by Julia Conley



Parkland father protest
'Fulfill Your Promises,' Biden Told Four Years After Parkland Massacre
"I'm disappointed," said survivor and activist David Hogg, "and frankly, if I could say one thing to the president, it's that we need you to go out and act right now before the next Parkland happens."
by Jessica Corbett



Jessica Cisneros
'She Will Fight for the Working Class': Sanders Endorses Cisneros
"She will fight for the working class in Congress and together we will build a movement to transform this nation so that it works for all our people," said the Vermont senator.
by Julia Conley



A South African researcher works in a vaccine lab
African Civil Society Slams Moderna Attempt to 'Derail' Vaccine Project
"It's an outrageous act of gaslighting and we won't stand for it," said one public health campaigner.
by Jake Johnson
Opinion



GAvoting
Georgia Republicans Are Deliberately Attacking Voting Rights
Georgia's new restrictions strike at the heart of that Democratic stronghold, especially Black voters.
by Steven Harper



A second grade teacher sanitizes students' desks for snack time at South Boston Catholic Academy in South Boston on Sept. 10, 2020.
Schools in Crisis and Systems Failure: An SOS
A return to a normal that was never good enough
by Belle Chesler
Our 2022 Winter Campaign Is Underway
Our fiercely independent, people-powered model of journalism relies on you, our readers. Please support Common Dreams today.


Common Dreams
PO Box 443
Portland, ME 04112
United States





AIG still loves coal

 


Insurance company American International Group (AIG) just announced it’s not renewing existing coverage for thousands of homeowners in wildfire-prone areas of California.

Instead, it will offer policies that could cost three to five times what customers pay now — with less generous coverage, to boot.

But AIG is still a top insurance provider to dirty coal and other fossil fuels that are driving dangerous wildfires and other climate disasters.

We must call out this hypocrisy by sending a message to the top.

For Valentine’s Day, let’s show AIG’s CEO some love: Comment on his LinkedIn post and tell him how you really feel about his relationship with the coal industry.

(Don’t have LinkedIn? You can also email AIG’s CEO and other top executives directly.)

Fossil fuel companies can’t operate without insurance. If we convince AIG to stop insuring coal mines and power plants, we can deal a major blow to this polluting industry.

In response to pressure from people like you, dozens of other insurers have dropped coverage for coal. But AIG seems intent on being coal’s insurer of last resort.

Tell AIG’s CEO: It’s past time to break up with coal.

The company’s CEO, Peter Zaffino, knows the risks from climate change. And he’s making moves to protect his business.

But he also plans to make short-term profits off the climate crisis by continuing to insure new coal projects. Calling out his climate hypocrisy on Valentine’s Day will show his followers where his heart truly lies.

Add your comment to his LinkedIn post to send the message that his love affair with coal can’t last.

Thank you for speaking up.

Hannah
Public Citizen

Follow Us on Social Media

Public Citizen
1600 20th Street NW  
 Washington, District of Columbia 20009





PRESS: Senate's PACT Act Will Do Little To Control Drug Costs


alt_text

PRESS RELEASE

Senate’s PACT Act will give relief to patients using insulin, but will not lower prescription drug prices

Boston - Mass-Care, the state’s largest single-payer health care organization, commends the Senate for passing An Act relative to Pharmaceutical Access, Costs and Transparency (PACT Act). However, Mass-Care Executive Director Stephanie Nakajima cautions that since the bill introduces no bulk prescription drug program or new regulations on pharmaceutical companies, it is therefore unlikely to have any significant impact on the high and rapidly increasing costs of prescription drugs.

 

The Massachusetts Medicare for All Act, H. 1267/S.766, would authorize the state to use its purchasing power to negotiate price discounts for prescription drugs and medical devices; bulk purchasing is an example of how this could be done.

 

Strong points of the PACT Act include requiring insurers to eliminate deductibles and coinsurance for insulin and capping co-pays for the drug at $25 per month. Proposed regulation of pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), the middlemen of the drug industry who drive up prices for patients, pharmacies, and taxpayers, is also welcome.

 

However, nothing is done about the unit cost of insulin (or the cost of any other drug) paid by the insurance company, which means that reducing cost-sharing will not control costs but will lead insurers to redistribute those costs to all (including those reliant on insulin) through increased insurance premiums. Massachusetts already has the second highest health care costs per capita in the country, and while all areas of the health care sector continue to rise, pharmaceutical costs are rising much faster than both premiums and total health care spending. Direct regulation of these prices is needed to address the root causes of our state’s sky-high healthcare bill, of which low-income patients bear a disproportionate burden.

 

The PACT Act attempts to discourage further drug price hikes not through price regulation, but by a softer deterrent: if the cost of a drug rises above a certain level, the bill mandates that the legislature hold a hearing about the cost. To avoid a hearing, pharmaceutical companies will supposedly reduce the cost. It’s not clear that such a threat will be enough to convince drug makers to reduce their price; no precedent exists for that mechanism, especially at the state level.

 

The bill authorizes the Center for Health Information and Analysis (CHIA) to collect drug cost information from pharmaceutical manufacturers and PBMs and publish its findings. “While academics will use this data, and more transparency around health care pricing is always welcome, further study on the problem of high drug prices is unnecessary; drug manufacturers will charge whatever the market will bear, and every other developed country has already figured out how to keep drugs affordable for their residents through price setting and bulk purchasing”, says Gerald Friedman, Professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

 

This is why Americans pay more than any other country, including Switzerland, for drugs. Fortunately, we don’t even need to look abroad for a working model of bulk purchasing; it’s done right here in the United States, at the Veterans Administration. The VA competitively negotiates prices directly with drug companies, purchasing drugs for about 6 million veterans at half the cost of prices in privatized Medicare Part D. In addition to forcing insurers to cover more costs for users of insulin, we could actually get more services for our collective dollar by bulk purchasing the drug - and all other pharmaceuticals - at a lower rate. With drug industry profits at a record high, this shouldn’t be controversial.

 

Introducing bulk purchasing of pharmaceuticals would be a step towards a Medicare for All system in the Commonwealth. It’s also the step that the Massachusetts legislature needs to take to bring real prescription drug cost relief to our residents.

 

The mission of Mass-Care: the Massachusetts Campaign for Single Payer Health Care is to establish a single payer health care system in Massachusetts so that all residents of the Commonwealth will have access to comprehensive, quality, affordable and equitable health care because it is basic to life and human dignity.

 

# # #

READ THE RELEASE

 

Stephanie Nakajima

Executive Director

The Massachusetts Campaign for Single Payer Healthcare

alt_text

Twitter

alt_text

Donate

Mass-Care is a grassroots organization that fights to end the health insurance crisis by educating and advocating for improved Medicare-for-All legislation in Massachusetts.  



1534 Tremont St.
BostonMA 02120
United States

 






The GOP just tried to kick hundreds of students off the voter rolls

    This year, MAGA GOP activists in Georgia attempted to disenfranchise hundreds of students by trying to kick them off the voter rolls. De...