After all, these 4 banks (and the families who control them) implement global monetary policy - through their direct ownership of the central bank who issues the global monetary reserve.
But considering that the US Treasury and Exchange Stabilization Fund are integral to the strategy and execution of that policy (and whatever elements of it that fall under the supervision of "government policy") it's really not a matter of "political oversight" as much as "faction oversight" within the classe politique.
Again, because this arrangement between the FED and it's primary dealers, and the NY FED, US Treasury and ESF entails, in its essence, the very definition of corporatism (or fascism, if you prefer), the RonRand movement seems a bit silly in the way it is promoted and perceived.
It is merely one faction within the US government, wanting to check and balance the other faction that has closer ties to the banks.
But as in any foolproof partnership, one side cannot be effective without the other. Without the ESF / Treasury as a counter party to the 225 trillion or so in interest rate derivatives held by the big 4, we could not execute dollar faction monetary policy, namely ZIRP and bond demand (control over short and long end demand and pricing).
And without that partnership, executing policy in complete cooperation, this dollar system would fail.
And if we are to be entertained by the partisan theatrics on the Potomac, we should understand that there are no players more eager to see the dollar system fail than the folks at 1600 Pa Ave., who have been expressing (not too publicly) that the exorbitant privilege of the dollar system has become an exorbitant burden.
So really, confusion is the order of the day on this one. Clearly, anyone wanting to audit the Fed on Capital Hill would not have a clue as to how to act upon what they found, other than to "choose sides" in the debate.
My, my, my. As if not strange enough already, what strange bedfellows that would create!