The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is first among equals when it comes to the other 11 regional Fed Banks. That person has a big say on interests rates because s/he sits permanently on the Fed’s Board of Governors. So, should the head of the NY Fed have to be confirmed by the Senate? Senator Jack Reed thinks so.

Per The Wall Street Journal, under Reed’s proposal, the president would nominate the head of the NY Fed and the Senate would, then, have to vote to confirm:

“Simply put, this legislation is about holding the New York Fed accountable. It plays a pivotal role in implementing our nation’s monetary policy and enforcing our banking laws, and it’s just too powerful to be left unchecked,” Mr. Reed said.

The bill is the latest attempt by lawmakers to rein in the New York Fed, which has faced criticism that it isn’t properly policing Wall Street.

And:

Mr. Reed’s bill also would require the New York Fed president to testify before the Senate Banking Committee and the House Financial Services Committee at least once a year.

Mr. Reed and his staff have been discussing the legislation with offices on both sides of the aisle, and the senator expects it to garner bipartisan support, a spokesman said. Its prospects could be good. Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.), who is widely expected to become the next chairman of the banking panel next year, is a fierce critic of the Fed and its handling of supervision ahead of the financial crisis. In general, Fed issues—especially in the regulatory arena—attract a lot of interest from members of both parties.

A similar provision was part of the Senate-passed version of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial-overhaul law, but the language was stripped out during the House-Senate negotiations on the final bill.

I’m not entirely sure that this would end up creating tougher oversight. For that, you need a White House and a Congress really willing to go after the miscreants…which hasn’t been the case.