Clinton charged that Sanders' vote to deregulate financial markets contributed to the recession

[bigtree]

Reality Check: Clinton on Sanders' vote to deregulate financial markets

By Eve Bower, CNN

Clinton said Sanders "voted to deregulate the financial market in 2000," leaving the government unable to "regulate swaps and derivatives, which were one of the main causes of the collapse in '08."

The vote Clinton referenced was for the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, and Sanders did vote in support of the act. It passed with a veto-proof supermajority.

The law had been championed by key members of the administration of her husband, President Bill Clinton, including then-Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers and his predecessor, Robert Rubin. However, in a 2010 interview with Jake Tapper, then with ABC, Bill Clinton said of his administration's support for the bill, "I think they were wrong and I think I was wrong."

The act was later named a major cause of the Great Recession. According to the 2011 bipartisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report, "over-the-counter derivatives contributed significantly" to the 2008 financial crisis, and the enactment of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 "was a key turning point in the march toward the financial crisis."

Verdict: True


read more: http://www.wyff4.com/politics/dem-debate-reality-check-team-vets-claims/37489476

here's Clinton's response to Sanders (who never addressed her specific point about his vote) :

CLINTON: Well, the last point on this is, Senator Sanders, you're the only one on this stage that voted to deregulate the financial market in 2000, to take the cops off the street, to use Governor O'Malley's phrase, to make the SEC and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission no longer able to regulate swaps and derivatives, which were one of the main cause of the collapse in '08.

...does Sen. Sanders believe that vote was wrong?

transcript of debate: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debate-transcript-clinton-sanders-omalley-in-south-carolina/

[Gman]

1. I had no idea he voted yes on that. Incredible.

That really undermines his credibility

[Armstead]

8. Like he ever had credibility with you

You might read up on the circumstasnces of that vote. It's not like Clinton portrayed it.

And if she is so dead set against it, she must have had some interesting arguments with her husband, because Bill helped to ram that legislation through as one of his parting gifts.

[Gman]

24. Sounds like more excuses for Sabders

I'm waiting for the excuses as to why he was silent on the Flint water issue.

[Armstead]

25. Yeah real silent

(Please note this was BEFORE the debate)
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/16/bernie-sanders-michigan-flint-water-supply-lead-crisis-rick-snyder-resignation
Democratic candidate for president Bernie Sanders called for Snyder to resign on Saturday, saying he has “no excuses” for the the disaster.

Flint's water crisis: what went wrong
Read more

“The governor long ago knew about the lead in Flint’s water,” the Vermont senator said in a statement issued by his campaign. “He did nothing. As a result, hundreds of children were poisoned. Thousands may have been exposed to potential brain damage from lead. Gov[ernor] Snyder should resign.”

[Gman]

35. So why didn't he speak up in front of millions of viewers

And say this? I'll tell you, because the plight of Blacks is not a priority.

"the Vermont senator said in a statement issued by his campaign..." I think it's a pretty sure bet this didn't come from Sanders, but cane from a staffer. Otherwise, the issue would have been foremost in his mind going into the debate.

Nice try.

[Armstead]

37. You have no clue about Sanders

Honest disagreement about his approach or policies is one thing.

But clueless distortions of his values and motivations and priorities is a whole different matter.

[Gman]

40. That's not an answer

I'm just pointing out Sanders' problems and his really messed up campaign.

[Armstead]

48. What's his problem? He made a strong statement on the issue, and it was a day brfore the debate

What's he supposed to do? Go there in person and personally drink a gallon of deliberately tainted water to prove his point?

No, you are eitehr totally misinformed or deliberately distorting this issue and Sanders response because you don't like him and refuse to give him any credit or benefit of the doubt on anything.

You're not unusual in that regard. We all do it to an extent regarding our chosen candidates and their opponents. But if you are going to make it so eitehr/or, then own it at least.

[Cali_Democrat]

68. This is an interesting exchange between you and Gman.

I noticed the other poster is taking about the issues and candidate Sanders.

Several times, you try to make it personal and question the motives of the poster.

Stick to discussing the issues and candidates instead of other DUers.

That shouldn't be too difficult.

[A Simple Game]

97. Good point, perhaps you or Gman could tell us or link us to what Hillary had to say and

we could have a discussion of the merits of each candidates reaction to the disaster in Flint.

[Gman]

70. I greatly admire Sanders

And the common easy way would have been to simply call a press conference to address the Flint issue. He could even have gotten the press traveling with him together to give his statement. Hard was this to screw up? This primarily Black issue was dropped in his lap and he screwed it up.

Stop defending stupid mistakes and insist your candidate quit gluing by the seat of his pants.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

81. No sir. Moving the goalposts is not permitted. You stated that Sanders ignored Flint. You're WRONG.

You get to wear that; you do not get to change the subject without being called out for intellectual dishonesty.

[Gman]

91. Did I miss Sanders making a big point about Flint in the debate?

Not that I know of. Some staff are sent out a statement on Flint. Try again.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

94. That's not what you said, and you're not permitted to worm your way out of this.

The dishonesty of the Clinton campaign will be met with challenges at every turn. When you make a claim that isn't true, you're going to wear it.

[retrowire]

95. Nice try.

lol

SANDERS: Well, Secretary Clinton was right and what I did which I think is also right, is demanded the resignation of governor. A man who acts that irresponsibly should not stay in power.

He said nothin' huh?

Plight of blacks means nothin' huh?

Try harder.

[dpatbrown]

34. Really?

"Silent on the Flint water issue", is more than anything, an indictment of you. Get your facts together. No wonder you like Clinton. I would like to hear your "excuses" for blowing it.

[Gman]

36. Huh?

What are you talking about?

[dpatbrown]

41. He was not silent on Flint.

In case I missed something, your statement was wrong.

[Agschmid]

42. He wasn't silent, this is a complete misrepresentation.

I'm not voting for him, but get it right.

[Babel_17]

73. Did you watch the debate?

Michael Moore did, and so did many of us.

https://twitter.com/MMFlint

Michael Moore ‏@MMFlint 2h2 hours ago

FriendsinFlint- we FINALLY got the Dems 2 acknowledge the tragedy here. Finally. Thank u Bernie & Hillary. Now come here! Actions not words
297 retweets 754 likes


Michael Moore ‏@MMFlint 2h2 hours ago

And yes, thank you Bernie. Yesterday you became the first presidential candidate to demand the Governor's resignation.
731 retweets 1,633 likes

And as has been mentioned, Sanders called for the Governor's resignation, before the debate.

[pangaia]

28. Exactly about the circumstances.

The same with Bernie's vote(s) about guns.

Almost nothing is as Clinton portrays it. She will twist facts, edit, delete and lie about anything.

[merrily]

44. See Reply 14. The research done on this was sloppy and wrong.

[Gman]

98. How did he vote on reconciliation?

As if that matters. Mortgage derivatives are a side issue on this vote. He voted to deregulate derivatives.

[merrily]

99. If it doesn't matter, why did you ask? Tell 2008 mortgage derivatives were a side issue.

BTW, I am not sure what Sanders voted on. I don't know how the House bill he voted on read. Do you?

Why did Bill Clinton lobby so hard for this bill and for repeal of Glass Steagall? Wasn't the economy supposed to be his big achievement?'

You should read the article in this OP. http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511025742

Moreover, Hillary fully embraced her husband's record when she ran in 2008. I guess she's evolved on that too.

[Gman]

100. Ummm.... Bill's not running. Sanders is

[merrily]

101. So is Hillary--and she (a) embraced her husband's record in 2008 and (b) was less than honest about

this bill Sunday night.

Among many other things.

[Gman]

102. FYI. the First Lady cannot enact legislation

Nor can she sign it into law. Stop making up excuses and blaming someone else.

Somebody else used the lame excuse that Sanders was supporting the president. Geez.

[merrily]

103. Straw man. FYI anyone can approve of legislation, including someone who ran for President in 2008

and did exactly that. She ran on his stuff then because she thought it would help her. Now, she's bashing Sanders' with it deceptively.

FYI: Facts about passage of the 2000 bill are not "excuses." He did not do what she claimed, period.

Somebody else used the lame excuse that Sanders was supporting the president. Geez.

You should take that up with the poster who did that, not with me. Thanks. I would never have said something like that.

[Gman]

104. Straw man? Do you know what a straw man is?

You accuse her by virtue of being First Lady of pushing for the very same legislation Ssnders supported but it's her fault?

I'm done here.

[merrily]

105. Straw man "refuting" a point that no one tried to make. I said nothing about Hillary legislating or

pushing for legislation while she was first lady. Don't know why you're pretending I did. Anyone who reads the thread can see what I actually posted.
.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[dpatbrown]

109. "I'm done here"

Good idea. Your hole keeps getting deeper and deeper.

[CBGLuthier]

2. He supported a democratic administration led by her husband and she blames Sanders.

She really is a piece of . uhh.. work, yeah a piece of work. No fucking shame at all.

[Thinkingabout]

5. Sanders was a part of this bill in voting yea, Sanders shares the shame.

[Armstead]

39. Infinetly much less than Bill and the banksters who ran his administration

[Thinkingabout]

110. Let's see, first congress passes a bill and sends it to the president, yes Sanders is just as much

a part of this bill as anyone who voted yes.

[dsc]

7. Of course nothing is ever his fault

it is that evil woman's fault.

[merrily]

80. See Reply 14.

And no, this time it was her husband.

[Hortensis]

9. SENATOR Sanders is a U.S. Senator,

one of 100 governing a nation of over 300 million. He did not vote ignorantly, although voting stupidly is a possibility. He may have voted out of a go-along-to-get-along unity with the administration or he may have been serving personal interests more directly, but all responsibility for his vote is his own.

[Gman]

26. So he also supported the repeal of Glass-Stegall

To support the administration?

[merrily]

45. It's worse than that on the part of Hillary. Please see Reply 14.

[Sancho]

3. Bernie's vote was a mistake.

He didn't understand the future consequences of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act or else he was doing a favor for some big corporation.

Dodd Frank would help, as Hillary said, put a stop to the "dark money".

Bernie needs to admit his mistake.

http://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-on-dodd-frank-5-years-later-2015-7

On the fifth anniversary of a landmark – and controversial – piece of financial regulation, one of the bill's defendants reflected on what it was like trying to pass the law.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) spoke about the Dodd-Frank financial reform act in an interview with Americans for Financial Reform, an advocacy group.

"David can beat Goliath – that’s the meaning of Dodd-Frank," said the senator, who was a founding member of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, established under the act.

"We built Dodd-Frank with the biggest, most powerful institutions fighting us every inch of the way."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000

The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 (CFMA) is United States federal legislation that officially ensured modernized regulation[1] of financial products known as over-the-counter derivatives. It was signed into law on December 21, 2000 by President Bill Clinton. It clarified the law so that most over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives transactions between "sophisticated parties" would not be regulated as "futures" under the Commodity Exchange Act of 1936 (CEA) or as "securities" under the federal securities laws. Instead, the major dealers of those products (banks and securities firms) would continue to have their dealings in OTC derivatives supervised by their federal regulators under general "safety and soundness" standards. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission's (CFTC) desire to have "Functional regulation" of the market was also rejected. Instead, the CFTC would continue to do "entity-based supervision of OTC derivatives dealers."[2] These derivatives, including the credit default swap, are a few of the many causes of the financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent 2008–2012 global recession.[3]

[Armstead]

10. Doing a favor for a corporation?

Maybe you should look at the totally fucked up circumstances that led to the passage of that. It was a massive clusterfuck, and Sanders was merely one of the many members of Congress that was caught in an untenable situation.

[Skwmom]

19. The Dodd Frank that John Stewart called total B.S.

That Dodd Frank?

[Sancho]

23. No, the one Warren approved.

Sorry, but I'd take Warren's advice on this one.

[merrily]

46. Please see Reply 14.

[OnyxCollie]

4. The deregulation of derivatives becomes important

after the repeal of Glass-Steagall, when investment banks could play with other people's money.

[Hortensis]

13. Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1999, this repeal in 2000.

So are you pointing out that the deregulation of derivatives Bernie voted for in 2000 ("a key turning part in the march toward financial crisis&quot was the next critical step in a process of deregulation that had already begun?

[OnyxCollie]

54. On its face, it appears so.

Given that all I know about Bernie's decision is that he voted for it, that's all I can say.

Of course it was Bill Clinton's decision to sign both of those things into law, so Bernie's vote is not as significant as Team Clinton's economic vision.

[Hortensis]

61. Well, let's agree that Bernie's final vote to deregulate,

whether resulting from negligence or cluelessness, was not as significant as Bill Clinton's signature.

[OnyxCollie]

71. Sounds good.

Let's drink!

[merrily]

79. Please see Reply 14.

[merrily]

47. Please see Reply 14.

[OnyxCollie]

59. Nuance is important.

Thanks for the clarification.

[Thinkingabout]

6. Thanks for this post, bookmarking.

[merrily]

49. Then, you should be sure to bookmark Reply 14 as well.

[Armstead]

12. I'm sure Clinton would have actively opposed it if she were in Congress (not)

That whole bill was a massive clusterfuck. Sanders was merely one member of an entire Congress that got rolled in a massively complicated shell game by Phil Gramm and the banksters - and it occurred at a time when everyone was more concerned with the Bush v Gore aftermath.

[Hortensis]

15. Senator Sanders as a clueless buffoon

helplessly lead around by the nose by bankers? Strange position for a Bernie supporter to push, surely, Armstead?

It's far more likely that Bernie is not quite as pure as his supporters like to imagine. He has been in Congress for a quarter century after all. As we know, even the better ones like their jobs way too much for the good of the nation.

[Armstead]

16. Hardly

Sanders is certainly not perfect,. But he is absolutely NOT someone who would trade a vote on something that goes against everything he was fighting for (and against) for a corrupt reason.

Nor is he a clueless buffoon.

In that instance, there was not much anyone could do to stop the Gram-Bankster juggernaut and dirty legislative tricks to a convuluted bill during a lame-duck Congress that at the time was obsessed with the high-stakes aftermath of the Bush v. Gore mess.

[Hortensis]

55. Well, that's likely.

Bernie had been in the House for a decade at that point. Few really doubt his adherence to his own ideology. What is in question is his competence, his ability to make the changes he describes in vague terms with a striking lack of detail.

Bernie was in Congress through the deregulatory disasters his supporters are so angry about now. They blame everyone in both parties but Bernie merely for being there, but "they" were him.

[Armstead]

67. I was watching him then, and he was one of the few voices of sanity during that whole debacle

While most Democrats were joining the GOP and the Clintons in deregulating and turning the keys over to the Big Money Big Power interests,and praising Alan Greenspan, Sanders and too few otehr progressive Democrats were trying to stop this shit. But when the WH and the majority of Democrats are going along with the GOP to push through bad shit, the bad shit can't be stopped.

That is an indictment of the system and the elites of the Democratic Partry, not Bernie or any of the others who were fighting against it.

[Hortensis]

112. Armstead, I was a voice of sanity back then. So what?

I wasn't able to keep America from disastrously invading Iran. I was a real estate appraiser and the last person on earth to be surprised as the national real estate bubble was encouraged to grew to an insane level and burst, but nothing I did could prevent it. WHO wasn't smart enough to realize a billionaire class is the LAST thing a democratic republic should allow? ALL of us, at least all of us who bothered to think. And on and on. Mistake after mistake millions recognized and none stopped.

The sad fact is, Bernie is no smarter than 50 million voters and very unfortunately he was no more useful than the rest of us in wresting control of events from the plutocrats.

His popularity is based entirely on the simple phrasing and strong conviction with which he states goals he has no realistic detailed plans for achieving.

I want most of his goals too, but I've seen nothing to suggest he's the one to get us there.

[Armstead]

115. No, we collectively were NOT paying attention

When the plutocrats have D beside their name ad well as R's, it makes it real hard to make progress or even avoid disaster.

Perhaps a lot of people felt something was wriong in their bones, but there was not a damn thing to do about it, when the President and the media and far too many Democratic leaders were right there with the GOP and Big Corps and Big Money people who were pushing "free trade" and feeding us corporate bullshit about the "New Economy" along with the GOP.

And the only messages people had access to was crap like "Well middle class blue collar jobs may be disappearing but you can get a job if you're willing to learn advanced particle physics and join a high tech company with a great job." Or the opposite propaganda "Yes there are no more skilled trades job, but you can work in the service sector. Gosh look at those call centers." or "You too can start a business in your basement and become the next Steve Jobs."

And how many articles were there about how the New Economy was the end of the economic cycle and there would be no more recessions ever.

Maybe you knew it was all bullshit, but you're correct that there's nothing one can do about it alone. It can only be done through collective effort with the support of the political system. But when the political system is bound to the oligarchs and con artists, and common sense is shut out and people are being told "let the 'adults' handle it" ....well that shuts off the prospect of positive change -- or averting disaster.

That's what this is about. If everyone continues to say "No we can't change anything" nothing will EVER change.

But it is possible to mopve the needle in a better direction, if there is the political will to do so. And at this point, Sanders is the one who is giving a voice and shape and form that.

So vote for whoever you want. But please don't blame Bernie for the flaws in the system. And -don't disparage those who are simply trying to bring some common sense and common decency back into the system -- and who actually believe it is possible to achieve the things people claim they want but are too "pragmatic" and cynical to believe it is possible to at least move us in a better direction.

[Hortensis]

116. You weren't? I was, decade after decade.

[Armstead]

117. I meant the collective "we"...I wish I hadn't paid attention

It would be a lot easierr to just go "Go Dems Go! Rah Rah Rah! Whatever you do, I'll happily go along."

But I along with many others (perhaps yourself included) watched what happened to the country since 1980 and wondered what ever happened to common sense? Whatever happened to basic liberal values?

It became an era when even moderate liberalism was demonized as "crazed leftism."

The most glaring example was Reaganomics and the GOP.

But to me and many others, what was more maddening was that the Democratic Party -- which is supposedly the alternative to that -- became zombielike imitators of the GOP -- or corrupt con artists who sold out principles. Sure more liberal on some issues, but totally in step with the Corporate Imperative when it comes to issues of wealth and power.

Many tried to counter the Emperor's New Clothes, but were beat back by the leaders who claimed to represent them.

So they either succumbed to cynicism and apathy and defeatism, or succumbed to the GOP illusion......But some fought the good fight. Whether or not he is the perfect vehicle, Bernie is representing that urge for meaningful change and reform.

And the use of "pragmatism" to beat that back is just this month';s version of the same old bullshit that has been used to undermine values and principles and rig the system for 35 years.At some point that has to stop.

[merrily]

82. See Reply 14.

I take you don't blame Bill Clinton, who lobbied hard for this bill so he could claim a veto proof majority?

[merrily]

50. Please see Reply 14.

[Armstead]

60. I know...I've read the history (and was around)

It was one of those issues/bills mired in complexity and legislate and executive trickery and procedural tricks.

[merrily]

84. Yes. And they finally wrapped it into several other bills to ram it through.

Many protests about process, etc. You can tell even from the wiki.

[merrily]

14. It is NOT true. Sanders did vote for the bill (for which Clinton lobbied), but BEFORE

the de-regulation of mortgage derivatives was in the bill. Sanders was in the House then and that part was added as part of a Senate compromise AFTER the House voted.


What is true: Bill Clinton lobbied hard for passage of that bill and signed it.

Please see this post and sources linked in it. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1277&pid=9158

[bigtree]

20. did he vote for reconciliation?

[phleshdef]

113. Correct me if I'm wrong but....

... Isn't reconciliation a vote in the Senate only? Bernie was in the house at the time.

[bigtree]

118. after changes both bills need to be reconciled

...and voted on as a final bill by both houses.

[phleshdef]

119. Oh right, I remember now, when the ACA got passed and such, thats how it ended up working out.

[phleshdef]

120. Ok, I did the digging and yes, Sanders did support the reconciled bill.

The "compromise language" was introduced in the House on December 14, 2000, as H.R. 5660.[68] The same language was introduced in the Senate on December 15, 2000 as S. 3283.[69] The Senate and House conference that was called to reconcile differences in H.R. 4577 appropriations adopted the "compromise language" by incorporating H.R. 5660 (the "CFMA&quot into H.R. 4577, which was titled "Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2001".[70] The House passed the Conference Report and, therefore, H.R. 4577 in a vote of 292-60.[71] Over "objection" by Senators James Inhofe (R-OK) and Paul Wellstone (D-MN), the Senate passed the Conference Report, and therefore H.R. 4577, by "unanimous consent."[72] The Chairs and Ranking members of each of the five Congressional Committees that considered H.R. 4541 or S. 2697 supported, or entered into the Congressional Record statements in support of, the CFMA. The PWG issued letters expressing the unanimous support of each of its four members for the CFMA.[73] H.R. 4577, including H.R. 5660, was signed into law, as CFMA, on December 21, 2000.[74]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000

The roll call for passing the conference report (citation 71) points to this...

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2000/roll603.xml

I'm still voting for Bernie in the primary. I don't think this bad vote in anyway represents his career record. But the answer to your question is yes.

[Kentonio]

122. Yeah he did

But from all accounts there was some fuckery going on and most of the house was unaware of what changes had crept in. A bad mistake, but one shared by many people and not a matter of compromised principles.

[Duppers]

51. Thanks Merrily!

Spot on.

[klook]

52. Oh, you are such a spoilsport!

You're going to ruin their fun if you keep insisting on these technicalities!

Thanks for one of the few lucid and helpful posts in this thread.

[dixiegrrrrl]

64. Good on you, Merrily. Good information.

she did not bother to point out her husband was Pres. and wanted the bill, either.

If Bernnie had a record of voting against our interests, I would be concerned.
I wonder if Clinton thinks we are all so stupid to not see the sleight of hand behind her question.

[mmonk]

17. You ask the wrong question. What does he

propose to address it? That is the right question.

[merrily]

56. Please see Reply 14.

[hrmjustin]

18. Bookmarked.

[merrily]

57. Please see Reply 14.

[NCTraveler]

21. "Clinton charged that Sanders' vote to deregulate financial markets contributed to the recession"

Accurate statement. I didn't even think it was debatable. Then again, some will actually claim that Sanders didn't build support for regime change in Iraq in the years running up to the war. We all know he did, just doesn't matter to some. Just like some think he didn't vote against a pathway to citizenship multiple times, though we know he did. Just like we know he felt "literally nauseous" when listening to JFK. Just like we know he wrote depraved sexual fantasies when he was well into adulthood, not a child or youthful adult as some would like for us to think. Just like his recent support of Tea Party legislation, teaming up with Paul to try to politicize the monetary policy even further. Just like his wife being appointed to two commission positions by Schumlin shortly after Sanders stumped for him.

Now send this off to the jury because the truth is just too much for this place. Every single word I posted is the truth.

[Armstead]

27. You'd make a good attorney....However in presenting the whole truth of things, not so much

There are nuances and counterpoint-arguments for all of those points.

[NCTraveler]

30. I agree that some are nuanced.

For example, Sanders support for Pauls Tea Party legislation. When you get into the nuance, you find it is truly brutal what they are trying to do. The nuance brings out the true nefarious nature of what Sanders and Paul are trying to do to our monetary policy. It is much worse when you delve deep and bring the nuance into play. Same can be seen for his voting against a pathway to citizenship for over ten million people. When you get into the nuance, you find he secured nothing by siding with the republicans. He secured no support in blocking visas in the future. Nothing. He supported republicans in blocking a pathway to citizenship without securing one progressive item. Not one. Free help from Sanders in its blockage. That's what republicans got.

Do you know when Sanders cast his first political vote?

[Armstead]

32. Like I said, you'd be a good attorney

Alas, I don't have time right now to go into the counterarguments at the moment.

(I let myself get too distracted by DU rather than my own real-world work)

[merrily]

86. Disagree. An attorney who dodges material facts does not sit well with judge or jury.

[merrily]

85. See Reply 14.

[mcar]

22. K&R

[Omaha Steve]

31. BIG Dog could have vetoed it (an been on the record)

[merrily]

88. Please see Reply 14, OS.

[Armstead]

33. Yes typical Clintonian dissembling...And of course she contradicts herself

She fails to mention Bill's role, while simultaneously saying he'll be an economic advisor.

[dixiegrrrrl]

72. She said Bill would be an economic adviser?????????

NAFTA.." that giant sucking sound is your jobs leaving" Clinton???

[merrily]

87. Please see Reply 14.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

38. I think her husband

Signed and it all went down hill from there

[Fuddnik]

43. Clinton Rove strikes again.

Attack, undermine, and lie about your opponents strengths.

Expect the kitchen sink to come flying through in 5...4...3...2...

[bigtree]

65. this exchange began with a barrage of charges from Sen Sanders

...blaming Clinton for everything from corporate criminality to responsibility for the economic collapse due to her speaking fees she received from Goldman Sachs. She responded in kind


here's the beginning of that exchange (check out O'Malley, lol)

SANDERS: Let me give you an example of how corrupt -- how corrupt this system is. Goldman Sachs recently fined $5 billion. Goldman Sachs has given this country two secretaries of treasury, one on the Republicans, one under Democrats.

O'MALLEY: Say it.

SANDERS: The leader of Goldman Sachs is a billionaire who comes to Congress and tells us we should cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Secretary Clinton -- and you're not the only one, so I don't mean to just point the finger at you, you've received over $600,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs in one year.

I find it very strange that a major financial institution that pays $5 billion in fines for breaking the law, not one of their executives is prosecuted, while kids who smoke marijuana get a jail sentence.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debate-transcript-clinton-sanders-omalley-in-south-carolina/

[hueymahl]

75. I missed that part of the debate

Great points by Sanders!! Clinton truly is a hypocrite.

[LexVegas]

53. Fucking hypocritical. nt

[itsrobert]

58. Bernie did not even have a response or counter argument

during the debate. Hillary scored major points here as Bernie was reduced to just repeating his talking points cut directly have his rally speeches.

[merrily]

89. Please see Reply 14.

[ananda]

62. Now that is pure and unadulterated BS!

Nothing could be further from the truth.

[leftofcool]

121. Except that it is indeed true and a matter of record.

[EdwardBernays]

63. Jesus this is rich.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/181926

Her husband pushed it with his economic working group and signed it into law.

Sanders voted for it as part of an 11,0000 bill that no one read.

Not his shining moment no doubt. But saying he voted for something, because a President Clinton gave it to him, males him part of the reason the economy collapsed is pretty weak. And desperate.

[merrily]

90. Please also see Reply 14.

[EndElectoral]

66. Guess she failed to mention her husband pushed for the bill and signed it.

[Truprogressive85]

74. He voted with the Democrats ,but now he's the bad guy ?

He voted with the Democrats ,but now he's the bad guy ?
its not Bill Clinton who signed it ?


The hype of the Clinton Admin nothing more than bullshit - allowed for more discrimination against LGBT community, deregulated wall st, and incarcerated more black people.

[Politicub]

76. Sanders was probably confused about the bill

Giving Bernie the benefit of the doubt here. He's not good with understanding complexity.

His vote for immunity for gun manufacturers is likely the same story. He didn't understand what he was voting for.

[merrily]

78. No See Reply 14 and sources linked in Reply 14.

[Politicub]

83. I'm on mobile so I don't see post #'s

[merrily]

92. Here you go.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1024969

While you're at it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1025391

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1025697

[Politicub]

107. He voted against the Brady bill under similar circumstances.

So he just needs to own up to making a mistake.

The more I dig into his record on voting the more I find things I don't like.

[merrily]

108. You claim inability to see post ##s; I give you links; you ignore them and babble

about other bills instead?

Sure signs that sincere discussion was never on the menu. Have a great day.

[Agschmid]

93. It's so annoying that the whole thread has been spammed with...

"See reply 14"

Also on mobile and have no "easy" way to tell what the heck reply that is.

[Armstead]

106. Because reply 14 explains what happened and why

And because people don't always return to threads unless they get a response to their own post

[hueymahl]

77. I swear this whole thread is like being in the Clinton Spin Room. NT

[Gothmog]

96. Thanks for posting this

[karynnj]

111. Only 4 representatives voted against the bill

Joining Sanders as yes votes were the progressives, the Democratic experts on economic regulation (like Frank) and even a brilliant Congressman named Russ Holt!


Here is the "all Congressional actions" section
"H.R.5660
Title: To reauthorize and amend the Commodity Exchange Act to promote legal certainty, enhance competition, and reduce systemic risk in markets for futures and over-the-counter derivatives, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Ewing, Thomas W. (introduced 12/14/2000) Cosponsors (4)
Related Bills: H.R.4577, S.3283
Latest Major Action: 12/14/2000 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Finance & Hazardous Materials for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman..
Note: H.R. 5660 was incorporated by reference in the conference report to H.R. 4577. H.R. 4577, the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2001, became Public Law 106-554 on 12/21/2000.ALL ACTIONS:

12/14/2000:
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2181-2182)
12/14/2000:
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committees on Banking and Financial Services, Commerce, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
12/14/2000:
Referred to House Agriculture
12/14/2000:
Referred to House Banking and Financial Services
12/14/2000:
Referred to House Commerce

12/14/2000:
Referred to the Subcommittee on Finance & Hazardous Materials for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman..

12/14/2000:
Referred to House Judiciary "

Here is what was under CRS summary
"H.R.5660
Title: To reauthorize and amend the Commodity Exchange Act to promote legal certainty, enhance competition, and reduce systemic risk in markets for futures and over-the-counter derivatives, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Ewing, Thomas W. (introduced 12/14/2000) Cosponsors (4)
Related Bills: H.R.4577, S.3283
Latest Major Action: 12/14/2000 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Finance & Hazardous Materials for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman..
Note: H.R. 5660 was incorporated by reference in the conference report to H.R. 4577. H.R. 4577, the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2001, became Public Law 106-554 on 12/21/2000.SUMMARY AS OF:
12/14/2000--Introduced.

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

* Title I: Commodity Futures Modernization
* Title II: Coordinated Regulation of Security Futures
* Subtitle A: Securities Law Amendments
* Subtitle B: Amendments to the Commodity Exchange Act
* Title III: Legal Certainty for Swap Agreements
* Title IV: Regulatory Responsibility for Bank Products

Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 - Title I: Commodity Futures Modernization - Amends the Commodity Exchange Act to authorize appropriations for authorities and activities under such Act.

Revises specified provisions, including: (1) over-the-counter derivatives; (2) futures exchange regulation; (3) contracts; (4) prohibited transactions; and (5) boards of trade.

Title II: Coordinated Regulation of Security Futures Products - Subtitle A: Securities Law Amendments - Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 respecting: (1) regulatory relief for markets and intermediaries trading security futures products; and (2) and interagency cooperation.

Subtitle B: Amendments to the Commodity Exchange Act - Amends the Commodity Exchange Act respecting Securities and Exchange Commission jurisdiction.

Title III: Legal Certainty for Swap Agreements - Amends the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Securities Act of 1933, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 respecting swap agreements.

Title IV: Regulatory Responsibility for Bank Products - Legal Certainty for Bank Products Act of 2000 - Excludes specified banking products and swap agreements from Commodity Futures Exchange Commission coverage. "



http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:H.R.5660 :

Here is the House Sponsor's introduction:
THE COMMODITY FUTURES MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2000 -- HON. THOMAS W. EWING (Extensions of Remarks - December 14, 2000)



---

HON. THOMAS W. EWING
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, December 14, 2000

* Mr. EWING. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which provides us with an historic opportunity to modernize the U.S. futures and over-the-counter market laws.

* The time is now to ensure that the United States continued to be the world's financial leader. We have two of the three largest futures exchanges in the world, however, our antiquated laws and regulations prevent them from being as efficient and effective as possible to compete in global markets. The legal uncertainty surrounding the U.S. over-the-counter markets must be removed to prevent domestic business from migrating overseas and causing our share of these $90 trillion markets to shrink.

* The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 contains the major provisions of the House passed H.R. 4541. These provisions are in titles I and II of the legislation and provide regulatory relief for the domestic futures exchanges, legal certainty for over-the-counter products, and allow for the trading of single stock futures.

* This latest version of the legislation adds two new titles not included in the original House passed bill. Title III, Legal Certainty for Swap Agreements, provides guidelines for the SEC's role in regulating swaps.

* Title IV, the ``Legal Certainty for Bank Products Act of 2000'', excludes identified banking products from the Commodity Exchange Act. It provides guidelines to determine the proper regulator for hybrid products. If the regulators do not agree on who should regulate a product, the court will decide.

* Senator LUGAR and Senator GRAMM have worked tirelessly in the Senate, with the



House, and with the Administration to make this bill possible.

* Secretary Summers in coordination with Chairman Rainer and Chairman Levitt and countless numbers of their staff put in many hours working through this language to reach agreement.

* Finally, I would like to thank Chairman COMBEST, Chairman LEACH, Chairman BLILEY and all the Ranking Members who have worked so hard on this legislation, particularly to pass the H.R. 4541 version of this bill through the House, and to produce the final package we have presented today. Everyone involved and their staff should be commended for their extraordinary efforts.

* It is my hope that this legislation will enable America to continue being the world leader in financial markets for decades to come.

Here is the information on HR 4541, that is mentioned above as having had similar provisions:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 540
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

H R 4541 2/3 YEA-AND-NAY 19-Oct-2000 7:02 PM
QUESTION: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended
BILL TITLE: Commodity Futures Modernization Act

Yeas Nays PRES NV
Republican 194 2 25
Democratic 181 2 26
Independent 2
TOTALS 377 4 51


---- YEAS 377 ---

Abercrombie
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Cook
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crowley
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Deal
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fletcher
Foley
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill (IN)
Hill (MT)
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Kuykendall
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Larson
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Ose
Packard
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Riley
Rivers
Roemer
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Salmon
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Spence
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Traficant
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

---- NAYS 4 ---

DeFazio
Paul
Smith (MI)
Taylor (MS)

[hobbit709]

114. The bill that Bill Clinton signed. Takes a lot of gall there Hillary.