Sections
Home » New Economy » Whose Bank? Public Investment, Not Private Debt

Whose Bank? Public Investment, Not Private Debt

The public bank concept is gaining ground on the state level, attracting proponents across the political spectrum.
by

Monopoly, photo by David Muir

Photo by David Muir

While bank bailouts fatten Wall Street, states continue to battle the credit crisis. In the search for innovative solutions, some political candidates are proposing that states generate their own credit by setting up their own banks.

State budgets for 2010 face the largest shortfalls on record, totaling $194 billion or 28 percent of state budgets; and 2011 is expected to be worse. Unemployment has already officially hit 10 percent, and many economists expect it to rise higher. Continued high unemployment will keep state income tax receipts at low levels and increase demand for Medicaid and other essential services states provide. The existing alternatives are spending cuts or tax increases, but both will just serve to make the downturn deeper. When states cut spending, they lay off employees, cancel contracts with vendors, eliminate or lower payments to businesses and nonprofit organizations that provide direct services, and cut benefit payments to individuals. The result is a reduction in overall demand. Tax increases also remove demand, by reducing the amount of money people have to spend. 

Amanda Paulson, writing in The Christian Science Monitor, quotes Arturo Pérez, fiscal analyst with the National Conference of State Legislatures, which released its survey of state budget situations in December: "Unless you’re North Dakota, you’re probably a state that has had some degree of difficulty or crisis involving finances. It’s the worst situation states have faced in decades, perhaps going as far back as the Great Depression in some states."

So what is so special about North Dakota? It doesn’t have to rely on a recalcitrant Wall Street for credit. It makes its own.

“Unless you’re North Dakota,” that is—a state with a sizeable budget surplus, and the only state that is adding jobs when other states are losing them. A February 13 poll ranked that weather-challenged state first in the country for citizen satisfaction with their standard of living. North Dakota’s affluence has been attributed to oil, but other states with oil are in deep financial trouble. The big drop in oil and natural gas prices propelled Oklahoma into a budget gap that is 18.5 percent of its general-fund budget. California is also resource-rich, with a $2 trillion economy; yet it has a worse credit rating than Greece. So what is so special about North Dakota? The answer seems to be that it is the only state in the union that owns its own bank. It doesn’t have to rely on a recalcitrant Wall Street for credit. It makes its own. 

Candidates Across the Political Spectrum Pick Up on the Public Bank Model

In the quest to find ways to divorce the well-being of their states from the financial sector, a growing number of candidates are picking up on the public bank alternative. Florida, Illinois, Oregon, Massachusetts, Idaho and California all have candidates whose platforms contain this proposed solution to the credit crisis. 

A publicly-owned bank has also been proposed on the federal level. In 2008, presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, and Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate, advocated nationalizing the Federal Reserve (which is not actually federal but is owned by a consortium of private banks). In 2009, Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz said the government would have been better off funding a federally-owned bank than doling out trillions of dollars to private investment banks and CEOs who speculated their way into bankruptcy. Speaking at the New York Society for Ethical Culture on March 6, 2009, he said:

If we had used the $700 billion to create a new financial institution, allowed it to lever 10 to 1, which is very modest compared to the 30 to 1 that we were doing, 10 to 1 would have generated $7 trillion of new lending capacity, far in excess of what our country needs. So the issue here is not about lending. It’s really about saving the bankers. And what we confused was saving the banks versus saving the bankers and their shareholders.

Though the proposals to nationalize the Federal Reserve face powerful opponents in Congress, the public bank concept is gaining ground on the state level, attracting proponents across the political spectrum, including Democrats, Republicans and Greens. The issue transcends party lines. In North Dakota, a Republican state, the state-owned bank was inaugurated by a political party appropriately called the “Non-Partisan League.” 

dollar billMoney from Nothing
Supplying money should be a public service, not a cash cow for banks.

 Oregon: The Bankers’ Bank Model

In Oregon, Bill Bradbury has included a state bank platform in his bid for governor. Bradbury, a Democrat, was formerly secretary of state and has been endorsed by former Vice President Al Gore. His website declares: "It is time to put Oregonians back to work. It is also time to declare economic sovereignty from the multi-national banks that in large part are responsible for much of our current economic crisis. We can achieve these two goals by creating our own bank."

The Oregonian, Oregon’s largest newspaper, reported that Bradbury plans to deposit tax revenues in the public-interest bank, keeping Oregon’s money in Oregon. The bank would then lend the money to get the economy going again, targeting small and medium-sized businesses. Interest would be poured back into the state through more loans to start-up businesses, agriculture, and other key sectors. Currently, Oregon deposits hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenues into large out-of-state banks, siphoning the money off from productive in-state uses. Many of these banks are the very banks that needed federal bailouts to keep from failing in 2008, after years of handing out risky mortgage loans. These banks have now grown tight-fisted with Main Street borrowers, making Bradbury’s plan to get money flowing again especially appealing to Oregonian voters.

Bradbury uses the Bank of North Dakota (BND) as his model. Like the BND, the Bank of Oregon would return a dividend to the state based on its earnings, while creating jobs and stimulating the economy through lending. The state bank would not replace private banking institutions but would partner with them, particularly with community banks, providing them with new customers and helping them provide new services. To assure the state bank’s independence from existing financial powers, Bradbury proposes that a board of directors appointed by Oregon’s Senate should govern the bank, while taking advice from an advisory committee of experts.

Idaho: Keeping State Assets in the State

In Idaho, James Stivers, a Republican candidate for the State Senate, has also proposed a state bank to fill state coffers and protect the local economy. In the first indication of a political shift among grassroots Republicans, Stivers swept a closed-ballot preference poll at the GOP District 2 Central Committee meeting in Coeur d’Alene on February 13, winning the non-binding poll 10 to zero. Stivers declares:

An important part of sovereignty is the monetary authority. Currently, banks are allowed to multiply many times over the tax receipts deposited in their institutions. This special privilege is partly responsible for the ‘sucking sound’ in our local economies, as regional banks send their assets to central banks that are playing the derivatives markets of the world.

A state bank would restore this privilege to the people in a public trust and would give us the opportunity to back our deposits with the wealth from our public lands.

YES! Magazine encourages you to make free use of this article by taking these easy steps. Brown, E. (2010, February 19). Whose Bank? Public Investment, Not Private Debt. Retrieved September 05, 2010, from Web site: http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/campaign-for-state-owned-banks. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons License

Donate to YES! magazine


Reader Comments

Public (state) banking

Posted by Jerry Ackerman at Feb 20, 2010 03:22 PM
Certainly one of ELLEN BROWN's best.
Crucial to providing understanding essential to the decision-makers
trying to rescue the well-being of us all from the corrupt forces
in Wall Street and Washington.

Rate difference between CDs and mortgage

Posted by michael mazur at Feb 21, 2010 01:28 AM
Amoral radio jockeys make the plea for the private banks that they only make 2% difference between the 6% they pay on CDs and the 8% they charge on mortgages, when those aware of the practice of fractional reserve banking know that the private banks could still make profits if they paid 8% on CDs and charged 6% on mortgages.

Rate Difference

Posted by Jim Dueweke at Feb 21, 2010 05:23 PM
Michael

Please provide the arithmetic on the percentages you offer.

Worked example for Jim

Posted by michael mazur at Feb 21, 2010 09:34 PM
Certainly, Jim, as it happens Farid Khavari, a Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Florida, given space in the article, gives the example of the state bank paying 6% on a deposit of $100, and by the practice of fractional reserve lending of that $100, loans totalling $900 will result, on which 2% interest is charged. At year's end the state has a return of $12 on the $100 deposit.

When i read his example of the fractional reserve principle in action i remembered that amoral radio jockeys sometimes, in passing, never directly, cry poor for the banks implying they only make the slender difference between what they pay out on deposits and what they charge on loans - completely never ever mentioning the interest multiplier effect of the clever technique known as fractional reserve banking in which the banks know that a run on them can nearly always be ruled out.

As for working out my example the bank will pay 8% on a $100 deposit, which, by applying the principle of FRL, allows $900 to loaned out at 6%. At year's end the bank has a return of $46.

My example shows the private bank making more than does Farid's state bank.

Interest-free currencies going global

Posted by KingofthePaupers at Feb 22, 2010 03:14 PM
Jct: With Africa trading with mobile-phone minutes, Arabia trading with mobile-phone card credits, with Hours being traded in Ithaca, with Greencredits being traded in LETS, Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, offering social currencies to their databases, the banks get no interest. Now with States turning banks into public utilities, the jig is up. The people will profit from owning the banks, not private persons.

cooperative banks

Posted by Ramsey at Mar 04, 2010 07:42 PM
Also worth considering are cooperatively owned banks, in which the depositors own the banks.

In New Zealand for instance there are PSIS www.psis.co.nz and SBS Bank www.sbs.net.nz, and they're all over India, and Europe also, especially France and the Netherlands.

Globally check out wwww.icba.coop and in Europe www.eurocoopbanks.coop

Banks Own the State

Posted by Steven at Mar 15, 2010 11:58 PM
"STATE" banks are useless at this point as the banks own the state (local and fed.)

If we could trust the state, it would be different, but these are the people who have enabled the "system" thus far.

We are at WAR (ask Warren Buffet for details) and no half-ass idea will fly in these times. State banks have no traction. Ask PRETTY PLEASE...

USURY is the problem and it won't be solved by surrendering to those who have gained power by its leverage. State and Local politicians are bought and sold by usurers for lower costs than their federal accomplices.

A State bank might be a good thing, if we could trust the State -- but we can't. You know that, I know that and THEY know that. What's new?

So, it remains to identify the POWER of the PEOPLE. It is our aggregate purchasing power, our CONSUMERISM. This is the only real answer.

IF you don't like the BANKS, don't support them.

Let us focus (as a laser focuses light) our accumulated power on the BANK OF AMERICA (for a start). Destroy BofA (via boycott) and follow on with other multi-nationals until the CREEPLE (Illuminati, elite, whatever) surrender to our will.

We outnumber them hundreds to one. We can win if we work together.

We need a coherent focus on true freedom.

Working toward a fair NWO,
OlRailbird

Get David Korten's latest book FREE with your new 1-year subscription to YES!

Personal tools