Clinton: Cooperation, not speeches, is needed to regulate Wall Street

[portlander23]

The Hill: Clinton: Cooperation, not speeches, is needed to regulate Wall Street

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Democratic presidential candidate Clinton defended her decision to not be a "stem winder" in calling to break up big banks, a clear reference to her 2016 challenger Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

"I may not always be the stem winder about these things, because I think it's important and I've been around Washington long enough to know that you have to get people to agree if you want to get something done," Clinton told Dunham.

Progressives have long raised concerns about Clinton's ties to Wall Street, and Sanders, a self-described socialist, has surged in recent weeks in part because of his rousing anti-big-business speeches.

"You know, some people say, 'All we have to do it break up the banks,'" Clinton continued.

"The problem with that is that the banks did their fair share of trouble, but a lot of problems were not from these traditional banks, they were from what’s called the shadow-banking world like Lehman Brothers, which went belly up and brought a lot of people down with them; or AIG, a gigantic insurance company."

"I feel strongly that the Dodd-Frank legislation that was passed after President Obama took office is a good down payment, but it's not good enough," Clinton said.

"We are now fighting just to get it implemented. … What has not been implemented, I will absolutely implement it, and then I will look for any other abuses that needs to be stopped and curved."

Mrs. Clinton has not come out in favor of restoring the Glass-Steagall Act. Mrs. Clinton has historically received large contributions from the banking sector.

[jeff47]

1. You mean the shadow banks that only exist because Glass-Steagall does not exist.

[Recursion]

25. No, Gass-Steagall did not impact AIG or Lehmen or Bear Stearns or Goldman or....

The only bank that got into trouble that had been regulated by Glass-Steagall was Citi, and Citi got in trouble because it made bad investments that would have been perfectly legal under Glass-Steagall.

[portlander23]

30. It wasn't the trigger, but it was part of why there was an industry-wide crisis

Demos: Owning the Consequences: Clinton and the Repeal of Glass-Steagall

Here is why Bill Clinton’s simply wrong.

The financial crisis occurred because banks involved in trading had become massive, concentrated and interconnected in response to the repeal of Glass-Steagall’s separation. It makes no difference that Bear Stearns and Lehman were not actually universal banks (meaning both commercial and investment). The point was that they were enormous and completely tied into the other big banks.

There were only five notable investment banks left in early 2008. Of those, two went down, a third (Merrill Lynch) survived only by a forced merger into Bank of America, and the fourth and fifth—Goldman and Morgan Stanley—were threatened with failure when they were converted overnight to universal banks. Converting to universal banks qualified them for FDIC insurance and the implicit support of the US government.

The big universal banks were directly in the path of the financial crisis and would not have survived without the TARP bailout (provided with no strings attached) and dozens of other supports from the Fed and Treasury.

Of course, as Clinton said, the “unified” banks were slightly less likely to fail because they were connected to the US Treasury indirectly through FDIC insurance. However, the real question was whether failure of any individual banks of certain significance could potentially trigger a systemic failure, dragging down all banks.

That was exactly what happened in 2008. It was a direct result of the massive increase in the size, concentration and interconnectedness of financial institutions as a consequence of the Graham-Leach-Bliley Act. The former President did many fine things, but signing that Act was not one of them.

It's technically correct that the repeal of Glass-Steagal was not the trigger for the crisis, but it's incorrect to say that the repeal didn't contribute to the existence of the crisis and the widespread risk of the 2008 banking meltdown.

It's ridiculous to argue we don't need to restore this regulation, and there's bipartisan support for it's restoration.

[RiverLover]

36. Here's why Liz Warren wants to reinstate Glass-Steagall~

Warren calls for return of Glass-Steagall
The Hill
7/2015

Warren called on Democrats to rally behind her proposal to re-instate Glass-Steagall, which President Bill Clinton repealed in 1999, during a speech in Washington to mark the fifth anniversary of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform law. She portrayed the repeal of Glass-Steagall as one of the causes of the 2008 economic collapse, something that Federal Reserve officials and Clinton refute.

"That high wall between high-risk trading and boring banking was punched full of holes until in the late 1990s, it was knocked down when Glass-Steagall was eventually repealed," she said. "And not long after that, the worst crash since the 1930s hit the American economy."

Warren’s comments come a day after an advisor to Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton said Clinton has no plans to push for the bank break-up bill.

“You’re not going to see Glass-Steagall,” Alan Blinder said, adding that he had spoken directly to Clinton about the issue.

Two of Clinton's challengers, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, have called for re-instating it.

"The idea is pretty simple behind this one: if banks want to engage in high-risk trading — they can go for it, but they can't get access to ensured deposits and put the taxpayers on the hook for that reason," Warren said.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/247929-warren-calls-for-return-of-glass-steagall

[jeff47]

39. Glass-Steagall kept them "at a distance" from regular banks

That insulation would have contained the crisis to the insurance/investment banks. Much like the S&L crisis didn't cripple "regular" banks.

It would still have hurt, just not nearly as badly.

[sabrina 1]

47. Please, deregulation of the Banking System led the way, which was predicted by some pretty smart

people, to the disastrous Global Collapse of the world's economies. Now it needs to be reinstated before they do it again.

How anyone could even try to deny that is beyond me. We know what happened and we know that warnings were ignored back when the neolibs finally got their chance to do what never should have done.

Glass Steagal prevented what happened for decades. Now it must be restored and the corruption of Wall St dealt with. Their clever Ponzi Scheme was exposed in detail for anyone who cared to read it.

Banks should not be allowed to become investment firms, using people's pensions to gamble on Wall St. Then set up one of the most blatantly corrupt system to cover themselves when they KNEW that eventually they would need that coverage.

And never again should con artists who gambled away this country's treasure, be bailed out by tax payers, then rewarded for their criminal behavior.

If anyone thinks the people have 'gotten over' all that, they are so out of touch with the people, still suffering the consequences, they need a rude awakening and hopefully will get it.

As for Hillary, this is one of the main reasons, I do not support her. We need no more apologists for Wall St in power in this country.

[FreakinDJ]

52. Working together with "Washington Insiders"

Were knee deep in it now ....

As if that has brought anything other then MORE for Wall St. and the Wealthy Elite. In my opinion putting lipstick on a pig just gets everyone muddy

[arcane1]

2. Has anyone actually said 'All we have to do it break up the banks'?

Has anyone claimed a speech is all it takes?

More lies.

[oasis]

13. "Some people say" Hillary said. Check the text.

[arcane1]

19. The proverbial "some people" who never seem to exist :)

[oasis]

20. Did you use Hillary's words out of context? Yes or no.

Since you attached "more lies" to your post #2, a person's honesty and integrity seem to be very important to you.

[arcane1]

21. According to the text, this is a quote of hers:

"You know, some people say, 'All we have to do it break up the banks,'" Clinton continued.

"Some people say" are her words. Those people are non-existent.

[oasis]

22. No one has ever said that? Ever?

I've heard it before over the years bars, barbershops, public transportation. Those people existed then and they exist now. I'll admit it's something you don't hear everyday like "is the coffee ready yet Dear?".

It is entirely conceivable Hillary has heard those words spoken, she has had contact with thousands worldwide.

[arcane1]

23. I've heard it mentioned as part of a solution, but never as the entire solution.

It's a strawman, IMO.

[oasis]

24. Banks being "Too big to fail" not talked about much nowadays but

there is still mention of it. Discussion, pro and con still exists.

[sabrina 1]

49. So could you name the people she is referring to? I presume she doesn't frequent barber shops.

If she is slyly referring to Bernie Sanders, then she needs to pay a lot more attention to what he ACTUALLY has said about the corruption on Wall St since deregulation was achieved.

Vague references to vague people won't do for someone who is asking us for the most important job in the country. She will be asked to whom she is referring, after which we can determine if she has actually studied the people who definitely want to break up those monstrous, corrupt institutions which have cost us, the tax payers, TRILLIONS of dollars that WE would like to spend on things this country actually needs, not to keep them in the comfort of the lives they have become accustomed to.

And we will need far more application of the law to those who break it, and more laws if necessary to make it harder for them to operate in the way they did which destroyed, and still is destroying, the lives of so many people.

Hillary seems to think it's all over with and everyone's doing fine. How on earth could she possibly think that when millions are still suffering from the losses caused by that massive corrupting of our economic system?

And many will NEVER recover. So unless someone is so out of touch with ordinary people it should be no surprise to them that this is a #1 issue for many Americans and will remain so until our 'rigged system' is fixed and some of these people are held accountable.

[oasis]

50. "Hillary seems to think it's all over with and everyone's doing fine"

What did Hill say that that is even close to what you suggest?

[sabrina 1]

53. She said we don't need to restore Glass Steagal nor to break up the big banks. That tells ME all I

need to know regarding her understanding of what this did to millions of Americans. Nor does she seem to know that no, we are not stupid, millions of Americans have done their homework on this considering they were the victims of it. What we found out was extremely disturbing.

That SHE hasn't or doesn't want to, means she either doesn't care that no, millions of Americans are not doing fine, many will NEVER recover from the policies of her Wall St friends OR she doesn't have a clue.

Which is worse I leave to others to judge. For me, when a potential employee has a history of making unwise decisions, taking advice from pretty questionable characters, I don't promote them to President of the Company. But that's just me, and what do we little people know after all?

I know this, when top issues for the people include re-regulating a corrupt financial system that has so adversely affected them and getting the money out of politics, who should someone who is running for 'PUBLIC' office be listening to? Clearly Hillary is not listening to the People or she would never have said 'we don't need to restore Glass Steagal'.

[djean111]

3. This is what I am afraid of -

I've been around Washington long enough to know that you have to get people to agree if you want to get something done,"

Like a war in Iraq.

[AtomicKitten]

4. More of the same.

[jfern]

5. Unlike the 2008 Republican nominee, she opposes reinstating Glass Steagall

Senator Dorgan's warnings that bad things would happen to the economy within 10 years were ignored. Bill Clinton signed it into law. Sanders voted no. Sure enough, we got the Great Recession within 10 years. Why is Hillary to the right of McCain on this issue?

[arcane1]

6. Reinstating it has support from both parties. If the next pres supports it, it can happen.

The Clinton crew says only she can reach across the aisle and get both parties to come together. However, that is NOT the case when it comes to this topic. Whereas Sanders would advocate for it and sign it into law.

She's basically admitting she would be the wrong choice.

[ibegurpard]

8. She has already taken that off the table

Not only that but a great many "sensible" people are telling us repeal of Glass-Steagall had nothing to do with the financial crisis...

[hifiguy]

17. The same people who say that Chimpy's War

had nothing to do with the creation of ISIS.

[reformist2]

16. After all we've been through, to defend the banks is not only Republican, it's just bad politics.

[CanadaexPat]

7. I remember that health care Clinton 'got done'

Campaigning as someone who can deliver would be an error for her.

[Motown_Johnny]

9. And Dark Money!! We need lots and lots of Dark Money to regulate Wall Street!!

So...

VOTE FOR ME!!!!!!

[ibegurpard]

10. what is needed

Is for transparent and ethical government to exert its proper and necessary authority over the financial industry.

[Autumn]

11. Of course Hillary will be more than happy to cooperate with Wall Street.

[jkbRN]

12. When will she GO AWAY??!!

I'm so tired of her BS

[roguevalley]

31. plus a zillion

[reformist2]

14. She's getting even worse! Openly declaring she's not going to rock the boat.

If I had any doubt before that she was a complete sellout, now I have none.

[hifiguy]

15. iOW, let the banksters write the legislation.

She is OWNED by the banksters. Lock, stock and barrel.

[bunnies]

18. *ding ding*

nailed it.

[snagglepuss]

26. Absolutely bang on. After all that has gone down in the

banking sector, that she opts for cooperation rather than regulation is jaw-dropping.

[nashville_brook]

27. well gee, by 2016 it will have been 8 years since the crash

and plenty of "cooperation" in the form of bailouts.

so...where's the regulation?

[elana i am]

28. no clinton, you DO need a speech.

a very simple and succinct speech that goes something like this: you are going to be dismantled, you are going to be strictly regulated. this is how it's going to be so get used to it. fuck you very much. the end.

[TheKentuckian]

29. No Secretary Clinton we need compliance to robust, well resourced and staffed regulatory regimes

with active oversight systems with long powerful teeth.

[TM99]

32. Yes, I am certain Clinton will cooperate with Wall Street.

Her cabinet would be full of the fuckers, and this is exactly what we DON'T need!

[artislife]

33. I just don't understand support for her from "liberals".

Listen to her! I just can't understand how someone who claims to be liberal would back her.

[RiverLover]

34. They either are low information or don't understand liberalism. /nt

[jeff47]

40. Much of it seems to be people rooting for their favorite sports team

"If they have a D on their jacket, I'll support them!!!"

If there was actual depth to the support, we'd be able to debate issues here. Instead, it's mudslinging.

[antigop]

42. some of them benefit from the status quo. nt

[RiverLover]

35. 'Cooperate' like allowing Citi to write their own laws & force them to be passed?

Like we do now? And why we need to change now?

Remember last December?

[Katashi_itto]

37. Corporate Candidate

[Sivart]

38. this part....

This part.....

"I may not always be the stem winder about these things, because I think it's important and I've been around Washington long enough to know that you have to get people to agree if you want to get something done," Clinton told Dunham.

sounds like the exact opposite to what she told the Black Lives Matter people.

She told them something to the effect of - you can't change hearts and minds....you just have to get the right legislation passed.

[Avalux]

41. Oh please. She's not going to touch Wall Street or her donors will be pissed. n/t

[nc4bo]

43. oh ffs

There's been way too much "cooperation" as it is...........

I'm so done it's not even funny.

[AgingAmerican]

44. The bully pulpit is needed

Arm twisting. Obama proved that the GOP will never, ever negotiate in good faith EVER.

[MindfulOne]

45. Clinton really knows how to "get along" with members of Congress, both parties, "Cooperation".

That much is clear.

[Bread and Circus]

46. Seems like for the past 25 years when Democrats "cooperate" with the GOP, people get hurt or killed.

From my view it seems like those who hold similar views as the Clintons who want to "cooperate" with the Republican Party really just end up co-opting or outright promoting what are traditionally white wing policies. This spans from economics to a permanent war state.

Many of the great "advances" of this "cooperation" has resulted in the outsourcing of jobs, main street economic stagnation, an every steeper treadmill for the average American, dead and injured soldiers, and scores of thousands more dead or injured both at home or abroad.

I don't believe the Republican people, many of whom are party of my community, are the enemy and I loathe that we call a third of the US population "the enemy" here on DU. However it seems when the elite of the Democratic Party and the elite of the Republican Party get together to agree on something it's almost always bad. This is especially true for the legacy of Bill Clinton's Presidency as well as the nightmare that was the Bush Presidency.

[sabrina 1]

51. Those who are really the power in this country don't care which party is elected so long as they get

to choose the 'gatekeepers'. It should be a warning to voters when they see who is funding candidates and it turns out to be many of the same people who screwed this country so badly.

THAT is what this election is going to be about, for the first time. The elites, people like the Clintons, on the inside think that we the people don't know what's good for us so THEY will decide for us.

The sheer arrogance is stunning. Because for the most part they are not too bright themselves and are totally puzzled at the rise of an unknown Senator from a small state no one ever heard until a few months ago.

THAT is because they are blind to the people, their opinions don't matter to them. We are the 'proles' in their view, and they consider themselves to be very 'generous' to masses of proles who have the audacity not to be GRATEFUL for the crumbs they and their fellow geniuses are so kindly willing to throw our way.

History is replete with this kind of arrogance and with what happens inevitably when those in power refuse to look outside their own small bubble and see and hear what the people are saying. Because it seems to me that the average college student today is smarter than these wealthy, tone deaf people who have already destroyed our economy AND more around the globe.

[WillyT]

48. Jesus...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

54. Talk is cheap. Electoral campaigns are expensive.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019

Top Contributors
Senator Hillary Clinton


Citigroup Inc $824,402 $816,402 $8,000
Goldman Sachs $760,740 $750,740 $10,000
DLA Piper $700,530 $673,530 $27,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $696,456 $693,456 $3,000
Morgan Stanley $636,564 $631,564 $5,000
EMILY's List $609,684 $605,764 $3,920
Time Warner $501,831 $476,831 $25,000
Skadden, Arps et al $469,290 $464,790 $4,500
University of California $417,327 $417,327 $0
Sullivan & Cromwell $369,150 $369,150 $0
Akin, Gump et al $364,478 $360,978 $3,500
Lehman Brothers $362,853 $359,853 $3,000
21st Century Fox $340,936 $340,936 $0
Cablevision Systems $336,613 $307,225 $29,388
Kirkland & Ellis $329,141 $312,141 $17,000
National Amusements Inc $328,312 $325,312 $3,000
Squire Patton Boggs $328,306 $322,868 $5,438
Greenberg Traurig LLP $327,890 $319,790 $8,100
Corning Inc $322,450 $304,450 $18,000
Credit Suisse Group $318,120 $308,120 $10,000

[azmom]

55. Enough is enough.