[ladelfina]

I had heard, also, that there were FOUR members voting, not five as referenced in d's post.

Quote:

The Fed approved the deal between JPMorgan and Bear Stearns under Depression-era laws allowing it to do so under “unusual and exigent circumstances.” This provision, however, requires an affirmative vote of not less than 5 members of the board. At present, there are only five members on the board with two vacancies, but only four approved the measure because governor Frederic Mishkin was not present, according to the Federal Reserve. But current law mandates that no less than five members can vote on the matter and states that members can be contacted through any electronic means, including by telephone and e-mail. “There has been no showing that, given technology in 2008 (as opposed to the 1930s when this language was enacted), the required attempts to contact Gov. Mishkin were made,” Lee wrote in the complaint.

Housing Group Challenges Fed’s Bear Stearns Deal - CommonDreams.org


This also, to me, would raise the question of WHY there are 2 vacancies out of seven.
It seems many, many gov. agencies are hamstrung due to willful chronic vacancies.. I attribute this to the R/Norquist "drown it in a bathtub" mentality. Ideologically, I can see where less/smaller gov. might be better.. but that is substantially different from intentionally bad/AWOL gov. If I KNOW I have to take care of something on my own.. that is different from charging someone with it and then finding out too late that no one's in the driver's seat, or that the driver is unlicensed a la "Brownie". Heck of a job!