Bernanke’s confirmation vote followed a 77-23 vote to block a filibuster and limit debate. Sixty votes were needed.

   The 70-30 confirmation vote was the closest confirmation vote for a Fed chairman in the Central Bank’s 97-year history; prior to Bernanke, the Fed chairman with the least Senate support was Paul Volcker in 1983 when he was confirmed 84-16 for a second term as Fed chairman.

  

             
               Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke

   At his confirmation hearing in the Banking Committee on December 3, 2009, Bernanke faced tough questioning from several unsympathetic and overtly hostile members of the committee, but his nomination was forwarded for consideration by the full Senate on a 16-7 vote; a score considered as an uncomfortably narrow nod of approval for a Fed chairman.

  First nominated to become Fed chairman by President Bush in 2006, Bernanke was re-nominated by President Obama last year.

                          Hardball

   In floor debate leading up to the vote to invoke cloture, Bernanke’s opponents expressed their lack of faith in his abilities as chairman. One of Bernanke’s fiercest critics from the Banking Committee, Republican Jim Bunning of Kentucky, used Bernanke’s own words against him to make the case against confirmation.

   Reminding his colleagues he was the only Senator to “raise serious concerns” about Bernanke in 2006 after his nomination by President Bush, and was also the lone ‘No’ vote against confirmation that same year, Bunning said he did so because he knew Bernanke would continue the loose-money legacy of his predecessor at The Fed, Alan Greenspan.  

   “From monetary policy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency and independence, Chairman Bernanke’s time as Fed chairman has been a failure,” said Bunning.

   The Kentucky Senator, who has decided to retire and not seek re-election later this year, took issue with Bernanke’s refusal to acknowledge any Fed responsibility in the creation of the housing bubble through their setting of artificially low interest rates.

   Bunning cited, as the most glaring example of Bernanke’s ineptness, his refusal to regulate sub-prime mortgages and quoted Bernanke to illustrate how far off-base the Fed chairman had been during his four-year reign as chairman.

   March 2007, Bunning reminded his colleagues, Bernanke said, “The impacts on the broader economic and financial markets, from the problems in the sub-prime market, seem likely to be contained.”

   Bunning continued, “Then in May of that year, he said, ‘We do not expect significant spillover from the sub-prime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system.’ The following February, he said, ‘Among the largest banks, the capital ratio remains good.’”

   Bunning quoted Bernanke’s on the economy from June 2008, when the head banker said, “The risk the economy has entered a substantial downturn appears to have diminished over the past month or so.” He repeated Bernanke’s comments made the following month, in July 2008, when Bernanke claimed that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were “in no danger of failing.”

   Promising he could continue with more Bernanke quotes to reinforce his point, Bunning said, “Finally, in May of last year, speaking about the unemployment rate, [Bernanke] said, ‘Currently, we don't think it will get to 10 percent.’ Well, we all wish he had been right on that one.”

   Another Bernanke critic, Senator Sanders (I-Vermont) said the economic meltdown of 2008 did not occur by mistake but was the result of greed, recklessness, and the “illegal behavior of Wall Street,” and CEOs who converted “financial institutions into the largest gambling casino in the history of the world.”

   Sanders said, “I think average American citizens have a hard time understanding how we reward failure, how we say to somebody who was asleep at the switch in terms of regulating our financial institutions, ‘Congratulations. You failed. There is a major recession. You are getting reappointed.’ I do not think people understand why and how that should happen.”

                     Double Talk

   Connecticut Democrat and Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd said although he planned to vote for Bernanke, it was not his choice for Bernanke to become Fed chairman, and reminded the chamber that Bernanke was originally a Bush nominee. 

   Attempting to have it both ways, Senator Kyl from Arizona said he would vote in favor of Bernanke’s confirmation despite the Fed chairman’s failure to deliver on the two key Fed responsibilities of maintaining stable prices and a strong dollar.

   The Arizona Republican said inflation, as measured by the Labor Department, had risen 2.9 percent from June – December 2009, and the manufactures cost of production had risen 4.4 percent last year and was up 9.5 percent in the last three months.

   The bad news continued as Kyl explained the dollar’s value dropped more than 10 percent in 2009, and said, “Much of this weakness is attributable to the Federal Reserve setting short-term interest rates at virtually zero. As such, gold prices have surged as investors worry that the dollar is no longer a reliable store of value.”

   Kyl added, “OPEC has contemplated designating oil in a currency other than the dollar, and foreign economists have suggested that we issue our own government debt in yen, euros, or yuan, rather than dollars.”

   Ultimately, Kyl said, Bernanke had his support because a different nominee chosen by President Obama would be “less independent” than Bernanke and would most likely be inclined to bypass Congress and direct Fed resources to support the Obama Administration’s policy interests.

             Knowing Which Way
             The Wind Is Blowing

   Of the 30 Senators voting against Bernanke, nearly half -14 - came from Senators whose seat is up for re-election this November - to include California Senator Barbara Boxer.  Opposition to Bernanke was bi-partisan. Eighteen Republicans, eleven Democrats, and one Independent caucused to cast a ‘Nay’ vote.

   Voting against Bernanke’s confirmation were: Begich (D-AK), Boxer (D-CA), Brownback (R-KS), Bunning (R-KY), Cantwell (D-WA), Cornyn (R-TX), Crapo (R-ID), DeMint (R-SC), Dorgan (D-ND), Ensign (R-NV), Feingold (D-WI), Franken (D-MN), Grassley (R-IA), Harkin (D-IA), Hutchison (R-TX), Inhofe (R-OK), Kaufman (D-DE), LeMieux (R-FL), McCain (R-AZ), Merkley (D-OR), Risch (R-ID), Roberts (R-KS), Sanders (I-VT), Sessions (R-AL), Shelby (R-AL), Specter (D-PA), Thune (R-SD), Vitter (R-LA),Whitehouse (D-RI), and Wicker (R-MS).

   Our two California Senators - Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein - were among the 77 Senators voting to invoke cloture and end debate. Boxer voted against confirmation and Feinstein in favor.

   Bernanke was formally sworn in for a second four-year term as chairman of the Federal Reserve System on Wednesday, February 3, at a ceremony in the atrium of The Fed’s main building in Washington D.C.  Had Bernanke not been confirmed by the Senate to continue as chairman, his 14-year term as a member of the Board would end on January 31, 2020.

   To learn more about The Fed, and its creation, read, The Creature from Jekyll Island, by G. Edward Griffin.

Lancaster Extends
Moratorium on
Dispensing & Sales
of Medical Cannabis

----- 

Mayor Parris Warns
‘Major Enforcement Effort’
Forthcoming

-- 

Less Than 48 Hours Later,
Dispensary Raided

LANCASTER - With the 45-day Urgency Ordinance prohibiting the sale and dispensing of medical marijuana adopted in December set to expire, the Lancaster City Council voted to extend the prohibition at their January 12, 2010, meeting for an additional ten months and 15 days.

   Mayor Rex Parris opened the public hearing and relinquished the floor to City Attorney Dave McEwen for his staff report wherein the city attorney explained that the council’s adoption of the proposed extension that evening would set the new expiration at December 7, 2010, for a total moratorium time-span of just under one year.

   After McEwen concluded his report Parris opened the floor for comments from the public. Lancaster resident Clarence Johnson addressed the council first and explained that he was a medical marijuana patient without a driver’s license, which made it difficult for him to travel to the San Fernando Valley to obtain his medicine.

   Johnson reminded the council that despite their prohibition on dispensaries, marijuana was easily had on the streets of Lancaster illegally, and then shared his opinion that the City’s ban was “ridiculous.”

   “Whether it’s a dispensary or whether it’s someone in an alley somewhere, there’s people selling marijuana in Lancaster,” said Johnson.

   David Paul, candidate for mayor at Lancaster’s upcoming April municipal election, followed Johnson. Paul did not defend medical marijuana but argued instead for the repeal of marijuana prohibition as part of a complete end to our nation’s failed War on Drugs.

   “It’s not that drugs are good, it’s that the ‘War on Drugs’ is worse,” said Paul.

   Paul said marijuana was the “least harmful substance that people use to alter their moods,” then added when a young person smokes marijuana and discovers it isn’t the devil it is made out to be, adults lose credibility, and from this, young people can be expected to think adults have also lied about the drugs that are actually dangerous, like cocaine and alcohol, enticing them to try them too.

   “Let’s remove marijuana from the list of terrible things and call it what it is. It’s just a plant that people have used medicinally for thousands of years,” added Paul.

   Following Paul to the lectern was January Ohelo who informed the council she appeared month-after-month to speak on-behalf of those that were unable to attend and speak for themselves.

   Citing Proposition 215, The Compassionate Use Act, approved by voters in 1996, Ohelo informed the council the law states marijuana may be used for any serious medical condition for which it provides relief, not just to alleviate the suffering of those dying of AIDS or cancer.

Ohelo then rattled-off a litany of ailments from which marijuana has been known to provide relief to include diabetes, nightmares, bulimia, alcoholism, tobacco dependency, carpal tunnel syndrome and Hodgkin’s disease.

   Instead of Lancaster running away from the issue by implementing a moratorium, Ohelo said she preferred Lancaster take the lead, stand-up, and explain to children, “This is our Nyquil, this is our valium, this is our vicodin…and this is our medicinal cannabis, and this is all off-limits.”

   Ohelo suggested the council take a look into their own medicine cabinets when they get home that evening because teenagers today have been known to steal their parents’ prescribed laboratory-engineered dope to catch a cheap and dangerous high.

   Melanie Coker asked the council for local regulation of collectives, to include her own. She then took issue with another local collective that drew attention to their operation by hosting a grand opening party and explained to the council her philosophy that collectives should not seek public attention, but rather operate quietly and discreetly.

   Barbara Mayzels recommended the council not implement prohibition and instead establish a set number of dispensaries that may operate in Lancaster and then regulate them appropriately as the City does with the dangerous and deadly vices of tobacco and alcohol.

   Referencing the “In God We Trust” motto displayed behind the council, Mayzels offered Lancaster’s pols advice on how to develop the political courage to address medical marijuana. Mayzels advised the council, “Don’t be afraid, roll away from the rocks, because, ‘In God You Trust.’”

   Comment from the public concluded with Mayzels remarks and Parris called for discussion from the council, of which there was none, except by Parris. The mayor reaffirmed his commitment to provide access to marijuana for seriously ill people saying, “We can work harder to do that.” 

   Leaving no room for mistaking his support for the continuation of the government’s ‘War on Drugs,’ Parris added, “There has to be a way to make this available and not deny cancer patients something that the doctors tell us will help them, without allowing it out there for recreational use.”

   Parris acknowledged New Leaf dispensary began operating in Lancaster prior to the December moratorium and had met with unnamed city officials. The mayor said he believed the proprietors of New Leaf were sincere in their work. “I don’t think they’re a criminal element. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so,” said Parris.

   The mayor continued, “It concerns me, that in my discussions with the district attorney, I have every reason to believe that there will be a major enforcement effort involving federal and State and local authorities, and you folks that are doing this could have serious, I mean, you can ruin your futures over this.”

   Parris made clear an enforcement effort independent of Lancaster was on its way, and pleaded, “I would caution you that we should really wait until the State and the district attorney and the federal government solve this before people end up in the criminal justice system needlessly.”

   The motion to approve an extension to the Urgency Ordinance was made by Vice-Mayor Ron Smith and the second was forwarded by Councilman Ken Mann. The motion was agreed to on a 5-0 vote.

   EDITOR’S NOTE: On Thursday afternoon, January 28, less than 48 hours after the council meeting, New Leaf dispensary on 6th Street East in Lancaster - and their Hydroponics shop on Pearblossom Highway - were raided.

   The Political Observer spoke with Stephen Ranken, a member of New Leaf Co-op, who was present at the time of the raid on the New Leaf dispensary in Lancaster. Ranken explained he had arrived at New Leaf’s 6th Street East location at approximately 2pm and was present for a few minutes when a man in civilian clothes entered with a handgun drawn and ordered the security guard aside.

   Immediately after, Ranken said six lawmen in tactical gear entered, armed with what Ranken described as AR-15 military-style rifles. The intruders wore body armor, black ski masks with eye-holes, and Kevlar helmets, according to Ranken, who said they ordered he and the other customers against the wall with their hands above their heads, where they and were detained in that position for about ten minutes.

   According to Ranken, in addition to the paramilitary, Kevlar-clad, entry-team, the law enforcement tactical package consisted of one Los Angeles Police Officer dressed in blue jeans, a T-shirt and civilian jacket – no identifier of “POLICE.”

   This lawman wore his badge on his belt and subsequently provided Ranken with a business card that Ranken showed to The Political Observer. The card was emblazoned with a Los Angeles Police Department badge and had the name of the narcotics officer, his ID number, and listed his duty assignment as Devonshire Division.

   This LADP lawman, along with a second plainclothes lawman, placed what Ranken described as “red evidence tape” over two cameras located in the hallway immediately upon entering, preventing the incident from being recorded.

   A second lawman – identified by Ranken as the individual making initial entry with a hand gun - wore blue jeans and a LASD T-shirt, and a third was a Fed wearing a “DEA” (Drug Enforcement Administration) jacket.

   According to Ranken, the LAPD and LASD officers conducted themselves professionally but said the Fed agent was “snotty,” disrespectful and repeatedly instructed the detainees to keep their mouths shut and questioned the legitimacy of Ranken’s illness and need for medical marijuana.

   Also according to Ranken, the LAPD narcotics officer and one LASD lawman returned marijuana to the patients caught in the raid, upon their release. But before his release, Ranken explained, he was brought into a side room within New Leaf to be questioned.

   The questioning lasted about ten minutes, Ranken told The Political Observer, with the interrogation conducted by the LASD detective that made the initial entry, in the presence of the LAPD narcotics officer from Devonshire Division.

   “I answered their questions completely and fully until they started asking about my medical condition,” said Ranken. The Political Observer asked Ranken why he chose to answer any questions at all, and instead remain respectfully silent. He replied, “I was always taught to be cooperative with the police.”

    Ranken said he was asked if he was a member of New Leaf Cooperative, to which he replied that he was. Next, he was asked how much New Leaf charged members for their medicine and Ranken said he answered, “They don’t charge.”

   The interrogating lawman then asked Ranken if he, Ranken, gave money to New Leaf for his medicine, and Ranken told The Political Observer he informed the lawman he paid for medicine at Walgreens too, and any money given to New Leaf was a donation to help the co-op meet the costs of doing business.

   “I never once admitted to buying or selling, or anything like that, because I’m not.” said Ranken.

   While being held prisoner, Ranken said he asked the two local lawmen why they were asking the questions instead of the Fed agent since the raid was a federal matter, and at that point, he said, he was informed by the LASD lawman that he was free to leave. Ranken said he received no citation.

   When Ranken witnessed the LASD returning medical marijuana to patients as the bust wound down, he said he inquired why they were doing so and was told, “We’re not here to bust you guys, we’re here to shut down the place where you get it. You’re not the kind of guy we’re here to arrest.”

    Ranken said, in his opinion, what occurred was a robbery. “I kept saying to them, ‘Why are you robbing this place?’ and they kept saying, ‘Shut your mouth!’ And I told them, ‘No, you’re robbing this place. You come in here, you take the weed, you take the money, and nobody is going to get arrested.’”

   Calls to New Leaf Cooperative were met with a recorded message explaining that the voice mail box was full.

    To learn more about our nation’s failed ‘War on Drugs,’ visit: www.leap.cc.