As
Fed
To Meet Feb 8
on Capital
One's ING
Deal, 600
Pages Withheld
By
Matthew
R. Lee
SOUTH
BRONX,
February 6 --
Amid mounting
questions
about the
Federal
Reserve
Board's
transparency,
it has today
scheduled a
February 8
meeting to
consider
allowing, and
probably to
rubber stamp,
Capital One to
buy ING Direct
and become the
fifth largest
bank in the
US.
But ten days
ago the Fed
responded to a
Freedom of
Information
Act request by
Inner City
Press by
withholding
590 pages
in full, and
at least half
of the single
34 page
document it
did
provide.
ICP
immediately
appealed, but
the Fed has
yet to
respond.
Instead, it
withheld yet
more
information,
from which ICP
has again
appealed. Then
past 5 pm on
February 6 the
Fed redacted
yet more
information,
trying to
issue rulings
to clear the
way to approve
the
application
while
information is
withheld.
Click
here to
view the Fed's
FOIA Denial,
from which
Inner City
Press has
already
appealed, and
click
here to view
the heavily
redacted 34
page document
that the Fed
provided
to Inner City
Press (and
Capital One to
NCRC and the
other
protesters
from which it
had withheld
this
information).
There is more.
In
the newer
case,
from Capital
One's response
to the Fed's
December 15,
2011
questions,
the Fed has
blacked out
the entirety
of Footnote 1,
which
seemingly
explains
Capital One's
lending in
California.
The Fed has
blacked out
on the top of
Page 6 some
Capital One
argument about
how and why it
will improve
the fairness
of its
lending.
On Pages 11
and 12,
Capital
One makes
representations
to the Fed
about with
whom it will
partner,
representations
clearly meant
to argue for
approval of
Capital One's
applications -
but Capital
One, and now
the Fed,
withheld the
names
and the
argument. ICP
has appealed.
(In response
to another
request,
Capital One
belated
released a
line that "Capital
One
was unaware of
the debtor’s
bankruptcy
because the
debtor
provided
Capital One an
ITIN number at
the time of
her
application
for credit,
but filed
bankruptcy
using a social
security
number that
she had not
shared with
Capital One.")
As
argued in
Inner
City Press'
FOIA appeals,
rather than
going forward
and rubber
stamping
Capital One's
applications,
the Fed should
re-open its
comment
period, inter
alia following
its now
appealed under
the
Freedom of
Information
Act denial of
January 24,
2012 of ICP's
FOIA
request of
December 4,
2011, for "all
withheld
portions of
Capital One's
November 15,
2011
submission to
the Fed on the
pending
ING DIRECT
application."
It
took
50 days for
the Fed to
respond.
Worse, 590
pages are
being
withheld in
full, and of
the single 35
page document
subsequently
sent to Inner
City Press,
much has been
redacted,
including how
Capital One
would pay for
the
acquisition,
weaknesses
in
ING DIRECT
(page 3);
all
information
about Capital
One's credit
card lending
to people with
FICO scores
below 660, and
subprime card
lending (page
4);
small
business
lending (page
5);
due
diligence
on HSBC's card
platform,
previously of
the predatory
lender
Household
(page 13);
forward
sale
agreements
(page 14 -
even the Fed's
question is
withheld, we
appeal that);
mortgage
lending
(page 16);
swaps
(page17);
and
the
entirety of
pages 19
through 34,
including the
Fed's
questions.
This is
outrageous.
The
Fed
cites
Exemption 5,
but it how an
"intra-agency"
exemption
could be cited
for what
Capital One
submitted is
unclear.
ICP opposes
the
invocation,
too, of
exemption 8
without
explaining in
detail the
type of
information in
the 590 pages
withheld in
full. It
is hard or
impossible to
argue about
this black
hole of
information:
the Governor
charged with
ruling on this
appeal should
review all of
the
information in
camera, and
release all
portions that
are not
strictly
exempt.
The
Fed
is
increasingly
abusing and
evading FOIA
and this must
be not
only reversed,
but explained
and
accountability
imposed in
response
to this
appeal.
This
information
must be
reviewed, and
released and
comment
allowed there,
before the Fed
considers
approving the
Capital One -
ING proposals.
For
the
reasons of
record, and as
argued by
NCRC, the
Federal
Reserve
should re-open
the comment
period to
fully consider
Capital One's
related
proposal to
buy the
ex-Household
predatory
lending
platform
from HSBC, and
the related
stealth ING
proposals.
Fed governors,
nominated
hedge funder
not yet shown
Now,
even the
Office of the
Comptroller of
the Currency
which is
considering
Capital One's
HSBC
application
has taken to
withholding in
full
information
concerned
Capital One,
then making it
difficult to
appeal. But
that's another
story - watch
this site.
Footnote:
When
JPMorgan Chase
executive
William Daley
left
as President
Obama's chief
of staff, to
be replaced by
Citigroup
Jacob Lew,
some wondered
if JPM Chase
might be
losing access
with
Obama.
But
now nominated
to
the board of
the Federal
Deposit
Insurance
Corporation is
the
head of JPMC's
investment
bank,
Jeremiah
Norton.
That is, an
executive of
one of the
largest
recipients
of federal
bailout funds
is being
placed to
guard the
FDIC, which
insures
deposits.
The
move
is similar
tothenomination
in December of
a hedge fund
executive from
the Carlyle
Group, Jay
Powell, for an
open seat on
the Federal
Reserve Board.
Beyond
the obvious
overtones
of putting
foxes to guard
the chicken
house, what in
fact was
learned
from the
global
financial
meltdown?
What conflict
of interest
safeguards
would be in
place? What
for example
will
Occupy Wall
Street do? Who
can still say
that the
Emperor has no
clothes? Watch
this site.
, 
