EFTS or EVE

It has been most interesting to listen to the initial part of this conference, particularly references to the continuing viability of the check clearing system, and views as to the social cost, economic justification and impact on the public interest of electronic alternatives. It has made me most grateful to have a job whereby I can meet with the rest of the gods here on Mount Olympus to discuss how we shall hurl electronic thunderbolts on the populace below and thereby insure their worship of our wisdom. It would be well to keep in mind, however, that they may have little faith in what we say, nor should they, for pronouncements about how others should live their economic lives is presumptuous, if not dangerous. While much has been said and written here with which to agree, there is an essential point on which my views depart strongly from some. The proponents of several views seem to make an assumption that such matters as the public interest and social cost can best be judged by whatever entity they deem suited to the task ahead. The real question is, who is best suited to judge such matters? Congress? The executive branch of Government? The Federal Reserve? Commercial banks? Savings banks? Bank card organizations? The Consumers Union? The Justice Department? Or is it the public? And if the public, how can it have any tunity to exercise its judgment except by the only effective method which has ever been found; that is, by choosing freely among a variety of competing services with complete information about the costs, practices, and benefits of each. My strong conviction is that the public should choose and my great fear is that they may never have the opportunity. If solutions are forced upon them it matters little which organization does so, for ultimate abuse of such power will be inevitable.