Why Big Banks Are Right to Fear Elizabeth Warren

[ashling]

“Being effective” is not the same thing as “passing legislation.” The latter is difficult for any freshman—heck, in today’s broken Senate, passing legislation is difficult, period. My point was that Warren appeared to grasp that there were other ways besides legislation to influence the government and the banking system. She was using the spectacle of a Senate hearing to do this.

the article indicates that this strategy is bearing fruit by including the following from The American Banker:

“Bankers are bracing for the start of more severe anti-money laundering exams as regulators rework their standards and prepare to issue another round of guidance tackling the issue.

“The agencies, notably the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, are feeling the heat as lawmakers blame them for not doing enough to ensure institutions are following anti-laundering standards.

“Regulators are likely to make exams tougher for banks of all sizes, though officials have noted the most serious problems have arisen at the largest banks. Some of the biggest institutions including HSBC, Citigroup, and JPMorgan Chase—have recently drawn the toughest enforcement actions related to Bank Secrecy Act violations.”

[MotherPetrie]

1. As long as bank minions populate the regulatory agencies, banks don't have a thing to worry about

An occasional tongue-lashing from Elizabeth Warren may not be their idea of fun, but it's not going to make anyone make banks start cramping their style.

Not unless there were 60 Senator Warrens in the Senate, and an equal majority in the House.

[msongs]

2. eric holder says banks can commit crime and get away with be cause they are too big nt