Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Single bank overlord will 'damage US'

Thursday 03 March 1994 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

WASHINGTON (Reuter) - Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve Chairman, yesterday reiterated his opposition to President Clinton's plan for a single bank regulator, saying it would hurt both the economy and the Fed's ability to manage a crisis.

Giving testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, Mr Greenspan said: 'We must avoid a regulatory structure that inhibits economic growth. Removing the Federal Reserve from supervision and regulation would greatly reduce our ability to forestall financial crises and to manage a crisis once it occurs.'

Last November, the Treasury Department unveiled a proposal to merge the regulatory duties of the four existing bank agencies into a Federal Banking Commission - a plan that must be approved by Congress. The Fed's regulatory powers would be scaled back.

Mr Greenspan said there should not be 'a single monolithic federal regulator' and that every bank should have a choice of regulator. He argued that the Fed should continue to be involved.

He also made a renewed pitch for the Fed's own proposal to replace the four existing regulators with two and give the Fed control over 7,000 more banks.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in