In Money and Banks in the American Political System, debates over financial politics are woven into the political fabric of the state and contemporary conceptions of the American dream. The author argues that the political sources of instability in finance derive from the nexus between market innovation and regulatory arbitrage. This book explores monetary, fiscal and regulatory policies within a political culture characterized by the separation of business and state, and mistrust of the concentration of power in any one political or economic institution. The bureaucratic arrangements among the branches of government, the Federal Reserve, executive agencies, and government sponsored enterprises incentivize agencies to compete for budgets, resources, governing authority and personnel.

Banks and bankers are hardly the most beloved institutions and people in this country. With its corruptive influence on politics and stranglehold on the American economy, Wall Street is held in high regard by few outside the financial sector. But the pitchforks raised against this behemoth are largely rhetorical: we rarely see riots in the streets or public demands for an equitable and democratic banking system that result in serious national changes. Yet the situation was vastly different a century ago, as Christopher W. Shaw shows. This book upends the conventional thinking that financial policy in the early twentieth century was set primarily by the needs and demands of bankers. Shaw shows that banking and politics were directly shaped by the literal and symbolic investments of the grassroots. This engagement remade financial institutions and the national economy, through populist pressure and the establishment of federal regulatory programs and agencies like the Farm Credit System and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Shaw reveals the surprising groundswell behind seemingly arcane legislation, as well as the power of the people to demand serious political repercussions for the banks that caused the Great Depression. One result of this sustained interest and pressure was legislation and regulation that brought on a long period of relative financial stability, with a reduced frequency of economic booms and busts. Ironically, this stability led to the decline of the very banking politics that brought it about. Giving voice to a broad swath of American figures, including workers, farmers, politicians, and bankers alike, Money, Power, and the People recasts our understanding of what might be possible in balancing the needs of the people with those of their financial institutions.

Provides an in-depth overview of the Federal Reserve System, including information about monetary policy and the economy, the Federal Reserve in the international sphere, supervision and regulation, consumer and community affairs and services offered by Reserve Banks. Contains several appendixes, including a brief explanation of Federal Reserve regulations, a glossary of terms, and a list of additional publications.

This is a book about politics and banks and history. Yet politicians who read it will see that the author is not a politician, bankers who read it will see that he is not a banker, and historians that he is not an historian. Economists will see that he is not an economist and lawyers that he is not a lawyer. With this rather cryptic and exhaustive disclaimer, Bray Hammond began his classic investigation into the role of banking in the formation of American society. Hammond, who was assistant secretary of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System from 1944 to 1950, presented in this 771-page book the definitive account of how banking evolved in the United States in the context of the nation's political and social development. Hammond combined political with financial analysis, highlighting not only the in.uence politicians exercised over banking but also how banking drove political interests and created political coalitions. He captured the entrepreneurial, expansive, risk-taking spirit of the United States from earliest days and then showed how that spirit sometimes undermined sound banking institutions. In Hammond's view, we need central banks to keep the economy on an even keel. Historian Richard Sylla judged the work to be "a wry and urbane study of early U.S. financial history, but also a timeless essay on how Americans became what they are." Banks and Politics in America won the Pulitzer Prize for history in 1958.

This book traces the history from colonial times to the present of the monetary powers exercised by the Congress under the Constitution. It follows the evolution of the American banking and monetary system from the perspective of specific provisions in the Constitution that authorize the government to coin money and regulate its value. The author critically examines how far the development of the contemporary money and banking system has pushed beyond the narrow powers spelled out in the Constitution. He shows how changes in congressional legislation, Supreme Court decisions on precedent-setting cases, and the evolution of central banking powers within the Federal Reserve System have expanded the scope of the federal government's monetary powers. Yet, the author views this history within the context of private limits to the authority of Congress and the Congress's distrust of lodging the central bank within the Executive branch, preferring instead to respect an independent central banking tradition. The Hamiltonian tradition, he concludes, still offers the best institutional arrangement to confront unstable markets and destabilizing political influence.

Despite the political potency of money and banking issues, historians have largely dismissed the Progressive Era political debate over banking as irrelevant and have been preoccupied with explaining the shortcomings, limitations and inadequacies of the Federal Reserve Act. The picture that has emerged is one of bankers controlling the course of financial reform with the assistance of political leaders who were either subservient, hopelessly naive or insincere in their public opposition to bankers. This book places their exertions in a larger, unfolding political context and traces in an analytical narrative the interplay of sectional and economic interests, political ideologies and partisan clashes that shaped the course of banking reform.

“…We have what is known as the Federal Reserve Bank System. That system is not owned by the Government. Many people think that it is, because it says 'Federal Reserve'. It belongs to the private banks, private corporations. So we have farmed out to the Federal Reserve Banking System that is owned exclusively, wholly, 100 percent by the private banks —we have farmed out to them the privilege of issuing the Government's money. If we were to take this privilege back from them, we could save the amount of money that I have indicated in enormous interest charges.” —Wright Patman, Democratic representative from Texas The above quote was from a 1941 speech by U.S. congressman Wright Patman, a fierce critic of the Federal Reserve. *A Primer on Money*, released in 1964 by the Congressional Subcommittee on domestic finance, explains in Patman’s introduction “in simple, everyday language how the US monetary system works and indicates where it needs reform.” It describes specifically: - What is money? - How is money created? - The role of the Federal Reserve System - Money supply and Monetary policy - Improvements in the Money System Although this publication is over fifty years old and changes have been made to the Federal Reserve System since then, it is a testament to Patman’s insights that this report is still relevant and important to today’s discussion about the role of the Federal Reserve in the U.S. economy.