Why Not Public Banking?

As an alternative to the Corporate Banksters, the idea of Public Banks has bloomed as an idea that can, along with the OWS upwelling for financial fairness, radically change the way the financial system works in America. It would return control of the Banks back to the people whom it‘s supposed to serve. This type of Banking has already been used in North Dakota successfully for almost a hundred years.

Author Ellen Brown writes about it on the ‘Public Banking Blog’ which can be found at


There is a also great discussion of it in the video documentary “The Secret of Oz (by Mr. Bill Still)”. This can be found on Youtube.


Here follows a description of what public banks are, and are not, from “publicbankinginstitute.org”.

Public Banks are ...

• Viable solutions to the present economic crises in US states.
• Potentially available to any-sized government or community
able to meet the requirements for setting up a bank.
• Owned by the people of a state or community.
• Economically sustainable, because they operate transparently according to applicable banking regulations
• Able to offset pressures for tax increases with returned credit income to
the community.
• Ready sources of affordable credit for local governments, eliminating the need for large “rainy day” funds.
• Required to promote the public interest, as defined in their
• Constitutional, as ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court

... and are not

• Operated by politicians; rather, they are run by professional
• Boondoggles for bank executives; rather, their employees are
salaried public servants (paid by the state, with a transparent pay structure) who would likely not earn bonuses, commissions or fees for generating loans.
• Speculative ventures that maximize profits in the short term, without regard to the long-term interests of the public.

These ideas are worthy of consideration.


Do you like this post?

Showing 5 reactions

commented 2011-10-29 23:17:07 -0400 · Flag
@ Brian Page

For the record, we are not experts and these are just our opinions derived at by reading and researching the subject. That being said, the difference between a Public Bank and a credit union is an excellent question. As far as we know, you have to join a Credit Union. I have not found anything that says you have to join a Public Bank. There are different types of Public Banks and Credit Unions, so it would depend on where you’re at . There are so many variables that it really is incumbent on you to do your research. We posted some links on our article that answer what public banks are and their advantages. The model we have been most interested in and using for reference is the Public Bank of North Dakota.

Here are some more links to help you discover the Wonderful World of Banking. JK : ) I’m getting giddy from all the research and my brain is starting to fizzle. http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/state_bank_option.php

To the best of our understanding, Public Banks and Credit Unions both work for the best interest of the members or account holders and generally have lower fees and terms.

Banks and Savings and Loans, on the other hand, are for-profit organizations, are heavily leveraged to make profits, and can then pay dividends to their stock holders. Some would go so far as to say that the Banksters would take everything you have, if given the opportunity, and do it with a smile.
The following link is Oregon’s reason for creating a Public Bank.

I hope this helped. NOW my brain is fried!
commented 2011-10-29 19:35:29 -0400 · Flag
@WolfPac New Hampshire

Thanks for the comment. We agree that Citizens United has to be repealed and corporate personhood must be obliterated. In our opinion, these are not divergent ideas, however, but different aspects of the same problem. As you yourself stated the corporations will laugh at us and say, ‘using my 1st amendment right, I disagree, here’s a billion dollars that agrees with me.’ We like the way you phrased this because it highlights the importance of money and how powerless we are without it. Citizens United has allowed people to become disenfranchised from their wealth and this translates into a loss of power. And without power, less can be done. So I guess, this may be a case of “which comes first, the chicken or the egg”.

Citizens United allowed nefarious organizations, as some believe the Koch brothers to be, and other entities to actively work with no oversight, against the people. We have seen that in Wisconsin, these entities have eliminated, through their wealth, governing bodies protecting peoples’ homes and their rights. They were able to create laws that made it difficult to vote in many states, and were able to change many laws effectively circumventing the constitution, all with the result of chipping more power away from the people. This gave them the ability to prevent unions from collective bargaining and in fact made it against the law. Many of these, we believe, can be traced back to the effects of Citizens United.

If you think about it, one of the greatest effects of Citizens United was that it took away the power of the purse for the 99% . Without jobs or even with low paying jobs, you can’t survive, and this is done on purpose to keep people under the yoke of serfdom. If you have no money, how can you make your house payments? How can you survive? So you lose your job, house, ability to feed yourself, etc. We see Citizens United as a move to eliminate people from access to their money, which equals power, and it has thus far been way too successful. The corporations (persons) have infinite amounts of money, and so we need, at the same time to protect the money we have (little though it may be). In order to fight those persons (corporations), who have an endless supply and control of our money, we need to have a banking system that protects and serves us, the working people or we will see this happen again and again. We highly recommend everyone to see the ‘The Secret of Oz’ by Mr. Bill Still. It is all about how the banks have manipulated this country from the very beginning and how they have caused these financial collapses numerous times for the sole purpose of siphoning off the wealth of the masses. This is a very deep subject and we by no means claim to be experts.

Current events only lend credence to what Mr. Bill Still posits and fits quite well with Naomi Klein’s ‘the shock doctrine’.
commented 2011-10-29 13:45:27 -0400 · Flag
Excuse my ignorance of these matters but aren’t credit unions a form of public bank? What is the difference between your public bank and a credit union? Just curious…
commented 2011-10-29 09:16:13 -0400 · Flag
Couldn’t agree more! Public Banks and more importantly having the US government print money once again instead of the (private institution) Federal Reserve who sells our own money to us with interest. But WolfPac as far as I know is going to have just one goal, taking away corporate personhood and getting their influence out of our political system. Nothing else really matters until this happens because we can propose all the fantastic ideas we want but corporations will just laugh at us and say, “using my 1st amendment right, I disagree, here’s a billion dollars that agrees with me.” Great thoughts though, I do totally agree.
published this page in Blog 2011-10-28 20:12:53 -0400

We need your help,
you can signup with:

Get Involved Anytime:

Our Pack


wants to volunteer
wants to volunteer

View All