Reid to play chicken on Wall Street reform, daring GOP to filibuster

[kpete]

Source: The Hill


Reid to play chicken on Wall Street reform, daring GOP to filibuster
By Alexander Bolton - 04/20/10 11:31 AM ET

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to play a game of political chicken with Senate Republicans, daring them to kill a Wall Street reform bill.

Reid said he plans to move ahead with immediate consideration of the financial regulatory reform bill, despite a GOP pledge to filibuster the measure.

“Remember, there are only 59 of us, so if a single Republican is not willing to join with us, there will be no Wall Street reform,” Reid said. “Republicans will have killed Wall Street reform. I am confident that will not happen.”

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a crucial swing vote, said Monday that she would support a Republican filibuster if Reid tried to advance a bill crafted by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/93283-reid-promises-game-of-chicken-with-gop-on-wall-street-reform

[ejpoeta]

1. that's what they need to do. stand up to the bullies! not just that though...

don't let the bullies frame the argument either.... and i am sory to say i don't trust the dems not to back down. but i hope the stand their ground!!

[JDPriestly]

31. Actually, ejpoeta, your post should start a whole thread.

Should Democrats in Congress ask a psychologist to advise them on how to deal with bullies? And while they are at it, should they ask the psychologist to advise them on how to deal with children who say "No" to everything. Saying "No" to everything is, in my experience, typical of two-year-olds.

How to deal with bullies:

Think about the issues yourself – writing down your thoughts and feelings can help. You are not going crazy, but you must remain in control of your own emotions.

Try to stay positive – bullies can get you down, but try not to let them get to you.

Try to ignore the people who harass you – walk away; refuse to engage in conversation with them. You don’t have to respond to their rude statements or harassment.

Be confident and assertive – use “I” statements. “I don’t like the way you spoke to me”, or “I think your comments are inappropriate”.

Stick up for your friends – you are stronger in a group. So always look out for your friends.

http://www.schoolpsychologyblog.com/how-to-deal-with-a-bully/

I think the last one: "Stick up for your friends" is what the Democrats in Congress need to remember ABOVE ALL. The minute that the right-wing Democrats start going their own way, the Republicans get to bully the whole country. So, the Democrats have to arrive at a consensus in their own ranks before they introduce bills into Congress. The Republican bullying makes that a necessity even though it would be much better if the parties could just work with each other. If no Republicans will break ranks, then no Democrats should either.

On the "No" tantrums:

First – you need to understand that toddlers have no impulse control. This is a critical piece of information, and you will need to chant it to yourself several times a day. Even when a toddler knows what she’s doing is wrong, and knows she’s going to get into trouble for it, she can’t help it. She just has to do it. So, don’t think your child is incapable of being trained when she gets into the toilet paper for the tenth time today. The best advice is just put the stuff away. And, don’t punish her too harshly. At this age, making punishment harsher for subsequent offenses isn’t helpful. The same time out routine each time will have more effect, though you must understand me when I say this – nothing except growing older will have much effect on a two year old.

Secondly, if you live with a two year old, don’t try to do anything in a hurry. Gone, at least for a while, are the days when you can "run to the grocery store". At this age everything takes a long time, and you should just get used to it. Trying to hurry them along only creates frustration for both of you. Let them try to get in and out of the car themselves. Let them pick exactly which grocery cart you’ll use. It’s good for their development and it helps keep peace.

Thirdly, pick your battles. Don’t allow anything that’s unsafe, but don’t try to control how and when everything gets done. If she wants to wear the purple plaid pants with the yellow striped top, some days you just need to let her do it. One way to minimize the battles is to give your child some choices up front, but not too many. For instance, pick out two appropriate outfits for the day, and then let her choose between them.

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/1-16-2006-86535.asp

[LiberalFighter]

36. 2 year old bullies would be good campaign material against Republicans.

[ejpoeta]

41. good post! i can tell you that whenever the republicans start yawing about something

and pitching a fit i think of my 4 year old who wants something and i won't let her. she stomps her feet and says NO! to me. i can tell you that it doesn't get her far. eventually she does what she's told. i don't spank my kids but sometimes i think these senators and reps could use a good wallup! at the very least a time out!

[Indenturedebtor]

59. Bwahahha good stuff! I must say that the bully part wouldn't be a problem if:

A) The majority of Dems had strong convictions that...

B) Couldn't be swayed with bribery and corruption.

[Enthusiast]

65. Exactly.

The Democrats should take steps to strengthen every aspect of the bill right now. If, that is, they are truly interested in strong financial reform instead of lip service and smokescreens. This is the time for Democrats to get in lockstep for controls on the derivatives market.

Why not do the right thing for a change? The electorate would reward us for being true to the interests of the American people, to our constituents.

But this is looking exactly like the HCR bill, written by and for the insurance and pharmaceutical industries and that stinks to high heaven.

[Indenturedebtor]

99. Truly... I am afraid that this is another case of the true powers cutting off a toe to save a leg

[Ticonderoga]

47. The minute the going gets tough

Reid and the Dems will pee all over themselves and capitulate by watering the bill down to nothing. Nothing new.

[No Elephants]

79. Not if they (Dems) think standing fast will help them (Dems) in mid-terms.

Unlike many here, I don't think Dems are weak or dumb. I think they choose to appear that way when they think so doing will hurt them less with their base than something else might. What might hurt them with their base more than seeming ineffectual? Selling out to lobbyists.

[Captain Hilts]

2. GOOD! Make 'em do it!

[polichick]

48. Yes, make them REALLY filibuster - cots, phone books and all! nt

[florida08]

3. now you're talking

call them out.

[breadandwine]

4. Aw, Reid shouldn't pick on poor ol' corporations. Corporations are PEOPLE! See this song ---

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8181493

[Kokonoe]

5. I would call it playing Wack A Mole. Not chicken. OEM

[sadbear]

6. "Wall St. Reform"

This is what we need to call it.

[MiniMe]

7. He did write McConnell a strongly worded letter first

[Qutzupalotl]

56. Words matter.

That's why the First Amendment is first.

[JBoy]

8. Yes - Force an early showdown.

It'll either split the GOP or get them clearly on record as siding with Wall St.

Either way, it's a win.

[No Elephants]

80. But the Republicans will pull their ole "We want reform, too. Just not THIS reform."

[LynneSin]

9. Wait til the campaign ads come out against republicans who didn't want Wall Street Reform

Republicans are stupid to not come to the table and attempt to build reform.

[rocktivity]

10. Such tactics seem to work on the Dems

when the Rethugs do it.

x(
rocktivity

[harmonicon]

11. as he should with every fucking bill - that dipshit (nt)

[ut oh]

12. I applaud him finally showing a bit of spine....

1. I hope it's not too little too late

2. I hope it's truely reform, not just some sugar coating over a rotting fruit...

[Enthusiast]

66. Yeah, but

once again, Reid is the very picture of weakness. I don't fault him for this but his manner and nature conspire to erode confidence in his leadership before he even opens his mouth. I'm sorry, but he should be replaced.

[No Elephants]

81. Why do you supposed Democratic Senators keep electing him their leader.

See Reply 79.

[Enthusiast]

97. That could well be true

but I still don't like it. So they really want to give into corporate interests so they play dumb and weak which is a better alternative (in their minds) than allowing us to realize we are being betrayed? I've thought the same thing.

[No Elephants]

82. Meh. I think he shows spine when his caucus wants him to show spine.

And when they want him to seem weak, he takes the heat off them. IMO, that's why they keep electing him their leader.

[wisteria]

13. I beleive in trying to get along and accomplish things, but I support Reid on this move.

I am sick of Republicans refusing to support anything and not being willing to compromise. It always seems to be their way or no way. So, Senator Reid-go for it!

[Lochloosa]

14. What is that hanging between Harry's legs?

[Enthusiast]

67. Yes, I bet his testicles have

doubled in size and they are now nearly the size of a peanut M&M. One forceful scary fellow that Reid.

[No Elephants]

83. You think his dick has something to do with his politics? Peculiar concept.

I don't know why mean can't get over having been born with a penis.

Imagine if they were born with the ability to grow a human being inside them, endure labor, push out a baby, then bleed for a month without dying, sometimes without even slowing down noticeably.

No one would ever stop hearing about their uteruses.

And that's before we even get to manufacturing nutrition, too.

Seriously, y'all are funny.

[Hosnon]

15. BRAVO!

Great move - can't wait to watch this unfold.

[groundloop]

16. "Remember, there are only 59 of us..." - that's ASSUMING Lie-berman stays in line

It wouldn't be a bit surprising to see Lie-berman play games with this bill also. With the idiotic senate rules being what they are, and with a handful of loose cannons like Lie-berman it's amazing that anything at all gets accomplished, much less important stuff like this.

[bergie321]

21. I know

What can we possibly only do with 58 votes? :sarcasm:

[Enthusiast]

68. We should mouth a scathing attack

on LIEberman if he even hints of such a thing. The President and every Democrats should say things in TV interviews that are calculated to make ol' Joe's mouth hang open in shock. I am dead serious. I'm tired of this weak kneed smokescreen bullshit.

[No Elephants]

84. Sorry, but they brought this on themselves. Just ask Lamont.

[Winterblues]

17. So I guess it has been decided there will be no Financial Reform.

It is without doubt the Republicans will fillibuster and do so in lock step..Reid knows that as well..

[Javaman]

18. In other news; Harry Reid's spine has come back to life. nt

[hughee99]

19. And how many games of chicken has Sen. Reid actually won?

Even when he seems to be holding all (or most) of the chips, he often still manages to disappoint.

[bergie321]

20. Some teabagger

Must have crushed up one of their Viagras and sent it to Harry.

[valerief]

22. Hmm, sounds more like Reid doesn't want Wall St. reform. Of course, they'll filibuster.

It won't affect their campaigns. They just have to say, "Guns" and "Jesus" on the campaign trail and they'll get their votes.

[alcibiades_mystery]

24. So you don't want him to go forward?

Want compromise?

What? What do you want to happen?

[Enthusiast]

69. Make it clear that our bill

is REAL. It contains real reforms that forever protect the tax payer, including reforms on derivatives.

We want TV commentators saying "Gee Whiz, Democratic legislators, you can hardly blame Wall Street and their Republican representatives for being apprehensive, this bill is awfully tough."

And that is the way our bill should read-tough! Then force the opposition to filibuster. We then take it to the airwaves with real conviction.

All of us can play a role. Slap those fuckers silly!

Otherwise we end up with something that looks like the horrible HCR legislation.

[No Elephants]

85. Call Elizabeth Warren. Or read the transcript from Bill Moyers' Journal

the last time she was his guest. Or even the transcript of this past Friday's Bill Moyers Journal.

[Enthusiast]

98. I already did. nt

[NewJeffCT]

29. They tried that in 2006 and 2008 as well

God, Guns & Gays...

Filibustering on behalf of the Big Banks won't play well with moderates, and it may help Democratic enthusiasm if we actually make Republics go through with the filibuster instead of caving in to their demands.

[zbdent]

23. I'd love to see it ... but could we get the "liberal media" to show the truth?

Somehow, I don't think so ...

[DCBob]

25. I think McConnell is blinking...

McConnell softens tone on finance regulation bill
By Shailagh Murray

A Democratic Wall Street overhaul bill may be gaining an unlikely champion: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). After a week of attacking the pending legislation as a ticket to new taxpayer "bailouts," McConnell is striking a different tone. Monday on the Senate floor, he called for lawmakers to move beyond "personal attacks and questioning each other's motives" to "fixing the problems in this bill."

And McConnell conceded, after being chastised by no less than President Obama in his weekly radio address, that "both parties agree on this point: no bailouts. In my view, that's a pretty good start." On Tuesday, McConnell returned to the chamber and announced he was "heartened to hear that bipartisan talks have resumed in earnest."

more: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/04/mcconnell-softens-tone-on-fina.html

[LiberalAndProud]

32. This news item makes me wonder what their internal polls must look like.

Not so good, I think. The Republican policy of obstructing all things Democratic is not playing well in Peoria, I would guess.

[DCBob]

34. Yep. especially on this particular issue..

Main Street hates Wall Street.

[zipplewrath]

26. Am I the only one that sees the game here

Conservative dems are going to be given "cover" again by leveraging the GOP opposition. They'll work behind the scenes with the GOP to encorporate features in the bill that they really want, allowing the GOP to give them voice. Reid/Rahm will allow them to be included "in a spirit of bipartianship" and then they'll get a few GOPers to not fillibuster. Obama will get to claim that he "rejected progressive ideas". The same GOPers will vote AGAINST the bill, along with a couple/three dems. In the end, Reid gets to look tough, the conservative dems get features they want, but don't actually have to run on, and the GOP gets features they want without having to vote for them. The GOP gets to claim they didn't "block wall street reform". They both get to run against each other in the fall. The money flows in (especially from wall street). And real progressive reform is once again replaced with basically warmed over GOP ideas dressed up as "change".

[DCBob]

46. You've summed up pretty much the way the game is played and has been played in Washington..

for centuries.

[No Elephants]

87. No, not for centuries. Not even for very many decades.

[Dr Fate]

55. No, you are not the only one. n/t

n/t

[TomCADem]

60. "Luntz urged opponents ...to frame the [bill] as filled with bank bailouts, lobbyist loopholes"

Maybe Frank Lutz posts on DU, because there is an amazing degree of similarities between "Democrats" attacking Democratic efforts to reform our financial system and the talking points of Frank Lutz.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/01/frank-luntz-pens-memo-to_n_444332.html

In a 17-page memo titled, "The Language of Financial Reform," Luntz urged opponents of reform to frame the final product as filled with bank bailouts, lobbyist loopholes, and additional layers of complicated government bureaucracy.

"If there is one thing we can all agree on, it's that the bad decisions and harmful policies by Washington bureaucrats that in many ways led to the economic crash must never be repeated," Luntz wrote. "This is your critical advantage. Washington's incompetence is the common ground on which you can build support."

Luntz continued: "Ordinarily, calling for a new government program 'to protect consumers' would be extraordinary popular. But these are not ordinary times. The American people are not just saying 'no.' They are saying 'hell no' to more government agencies, more bureaucrats, and more legislation crafted by special interests."

In Republican circles Luntz's words, which have helped the party score win the message wars over health care and other legislative battles, are often treated as gospel. Already, some of the advice he's offered on regulatory reform has found its way into the political discourse -- with a proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency seemingly on life support under Republican objections.

* * *

"The American people are tired of add-ons, earmarks, and backroom deals - but they are mad as hell at 'lobbyist loopholes,'" Luntz wrote. "You must put proponents of the legislation on the defense, forcing them to attempt to justify the 'lobbyist loopholes' and exemptions placed in the bill... Highlight the exemptions. Broadcast them. Remind them, 'The legislation is filled with lobbyist loopholes that exclude certain wealthy, powerful industries from regulations.'"

[Dr Fate]

63. LOL! I couldn't give a crap about what he says.

You keep posting his stuff in posts & threads that I have also posted in- he must be one of your favorite reads!

How can I be like Lutz- I thought I was "far left" on this. LOL! Sounds like tea-baggers calling Obama a socialist & a fascist at the same time.

I don't know as much about the Lutz yutz as you do- my overall concern is that I don't want conservative Democrats & Republicans to water this down. What the hell does that have to do with some GOP strategist? He's not accusing conservatives of watering down the bill at all.

[zipplewrath]

76. Care to quote some?

How about quoting some, side by side, for the purpose of discussion?

[No Elephants]

88. Maybe Luntz coaches Professor Elizabeth Warren, too. And Bill Moyers and his other guests.

A bill of this kind was supposedly Elizabeth Warren's idea, but she is quite critical of what Dodd produced. She's been on Charlie Rose and other shows, too


Both Bill Moyers Journal and Mother Jones have series dealing with the bill and the whole financial mess in Washington. Both are very instructive. I recommend both highly.


The bill will actually affect you in real life. What gets posted on DU won't.

[TomCADem]

100. Actually, Here Is Elizabeth Warren Contradicting Frank Lutz's Talking Points

Here is Elizabeth Warren completely and recently contradicting Frank Lutz's talking points:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/21/borger.wall.street.regulation/

A good political move in theory, only it didn't work. First, the outcry was over a "bailout" that wasn't. Granted, there is some money in the bill -- $50 billion -- but it's provided by the banks, not the taxpayers. And it's not there to bail out banks, it's to help the sick ones die properly without creating a panic. "Paying for the funeral" is the way Treasury sources describe it.

Republicans complain it would "open the door" to future taxpayer-funded bailouts. Really? "The notion is wrong," said Elizabeth Warren, who runs congressional oversight of bank bailouts. "At the end of what McConnell calls a bailout, the company is dead."

And get this: When the GOP leadership hatched this idea, it found more than a handful of Republicans -- and not just the usual moderate suspects -- who actually want to vote for financial reform. In fact, the difference between Wall Street reform and, say, health care reform, is that "there truly is a group of us who will hold our side's feet to the fire" to get a bill, one Senate Republican told me.

So when McConnell got all his Republicans to sign a measure to force more negotiations before bringing the bill to the floor, some were with him with a strong caveat: They would not threaten to filibuster a bill they think the country needs. Period.

[JohnWxy]

27. recommended. Hoooray for Reid. GOP is going to fight everything Dems propose. Just let them fight

this. Put the GOP politics of destruction (of anything representing progress) all out in the open.


recommended.

[Divine Discontent]

28. THEN DON'T LET 'EM CHANGE THE BILL FOR VOTES WE KNOW WILL BE NO!

that's what always aggravates me, so hopefully, this time they don't do that.

[Enthusiast]

71. Yes! No more weak assed bullshit!

We have had enough!

[The Wizard]

30. Since the Wall St. Banksters

had to be bailed out with government money it becomes a budgetary issue and solved through reconciliation. It can work with any bill by adding language that ties it to the budget.

[madrchsod]

33. just in time for summer recess and the elections...

ya better not wimp out barack and harry....

[NewJeffCT]

35. Or worse

water down the bill even more...

[orleans]

37. what's wrong with susan collins? n/t

[quakerboy]

49. Probably the same thing wrong with anyone willing to publicly ID themselves as Republican

A lack of a firm grip on reality, a lack of perspective, and quite often a lack of moral fiber.

[high density]

She knows the media up here will be selling her as a great "moderate" when she's up for reelection

no matter how she votes.

[BR_Parkway]

38. But make them do the whole 9 yards, standing at the mike, cots in the well

and plenty of coverage of them standing their reading the encyclopedia or something as they block wall street reform - not a single one of them could get reelected after that

[DesertDiamond]

39. GO REID!!!!!!!!

[CatWoman]

40. Harry FINALLY gets it!!

:applause:

[toadzilla]

42. I'll believe it when I see it...

[wordpix]

43. GOOD!!! Keep going, Reid

[rambler_american]

44. I have an idea

Let's invent a system where majority rules. Oh wait a minute. Isn't our system supposed to work like that already? I'm so confused.

[sulphurdunn]

45. Here's what I think is going on.

Both parties want to publicly support financial reform, but both parties want it to fail. The Kabuki theater that ensues will be about form and how to increase the power of Wall St. while appearing to regulate it. Yet, political competition is real even if financial regulation is not. Ideally, the Republicans will play spoilers and the Democrats will sell out to them after much bi-partisan posturing. In the end, some tepid bill will pass. The real winners will be the politicians from both parties who end up rolling in Wall St. dough for staging this fake fight on Wall Street's behalf while the "bases" will get to wave their pom-poms in anticipation of the congressional elections. It'll be another win-win situation for both parties. It will all be narrated and dramatized by corporate mass media, which are the biggest beneficiaries after Wall St. of this kind of political soap opera.

[Enthusiast]

72. And this is sicking.

We must mount a campaign to inform our Democratic legislators that we know their game and we are goddamn sick and tired of it.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

50. BREAKING: Harry Reid Finds Testicles

They were behind the couch....

....always the last place you look!

[flyarm]

58. behind the couch in someone else's house 5,000 miles away..and ..nah he doesn't find them! eom

[Skittles]

70. male body parts are not required for courage

[No Elephants]

90. Yep. Totally unrelated in fact. Some do say that the species would died out long ago,

if men were the only ones who could give birth. However, I would never be that sexist myself.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

96. I didn't say they were HIS for chrissakes....(nt)

[disndat]

86. IMO. It wasn't bigger and stronger

body parts. It was, as V.P. Biden put it so succinctly, the BIG F**KING DEAL, aka, healthcare reform that Obama, Pelosi. and Reid passed because of the gun put to their heads after the Scott Brown election in MA.

[No Elephants]

89. Please see Reply 83.

[Martunez]

51. 'Bout fucking time...

Shoulda done that with health care reform, too.

[disndat]

52. Election time for Reid.

I pray he gets re-elected. I would hate to see Schumer in a position to succeed him as Senate majority leader. Whatever the reason, passing of healthcare reform seems to have transformed, Reid, Pelosi besides Obama. That was the real showdown at OK Corral.

[Botany]

53. Mitch McChinless has already given in to Reid

and claimed victory too. :rofl:

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TomCADem]

61. DailyKos - McConnell Agrees With You! He Claims Credit For Breaking Impasse That He Created

McConnell totally agrees with your point that Reid caved into his demands:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/4/20/859113/-GOP-Obstruction-Bloc-Weakening

It seems like maybe the tactic of defending Wall Street and obstructing reform isn't something that the GOP caucus is staying united behind.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell struck a markedly different tone on financial regulatory reform today, suggesting an agreement could be struck with Democrats sooner rather than later. And Democrats have taken notice.

"We believe the process to achieve has now been reconstituted," McConnell told reporters after the Republicans' weekly caucus meeting this afternoon. "We are all confident that this can be fixed... Senator Shelby believes that there's been a very serious effort to re-engage."

McConnell of course gave credit to his letter signed by all 41 Republicans saying they were opposed to the bill as the kickstart for negotiations. To which Democrats respond that negotiations never stopped.

"Talk about taking people taking credit for things--that's like the rooster taking credit for the morning," Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), the Democrats' reg reform point man, told reporters after a caucus meeting. "This has been ongoing for people who have been following this thing. Welcome to the discussion.... Where has the leader been?"

The Republican leader has been busy maintaining his "permanent bailout" lie, perhaps finally coming up for air long enough to recognize that even a wanker like Halperin can't buy (or sell) and which one of his own caucus members has publicly refuted.

[flyarm]

57. Harry's first step should be a walk to the White House and demand Geither be fired!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-HTylLzXu8&feature=player_embedded

and then have Bernanke replaced as well!

This is all a dog and pony show!

who did Obama play golf with on his vacation last summer on his vacation..Oh yeah, the CEO of UBS...wake up people!

go watch the video I linked to .......and then tell me this isn't all a dog and pony snow job!


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

here is a transcript..

FDL Contributor Bill Black scorched everyone with his testimony on the failure of Lehman Brothers before the House Financial Services Committee today. His prepared remarks can be found here (PDF).

CHAIRMAN KANJORSKI: And now we’ll hear from Mr. William K. Black, Associate Professor of Economics and Law, the University of Missouri, Kansas City School of Law. Mr. Black.

BILL BLACK: Members of the Committee, thank you.

You asked earlier for a stern regulator, you have one now in front of you. And we need to be blunt. You haven’t heard much bluntness in hours of testimony.

We stopped a nonprime crisis before it became a crisis in 1991 by supervisory actions.

We did it so effectively that people forgot that it even existed, even though it caused several hundred million dollars of losses — but none to the taxpayer. We did it by preemptive litigation, and by supervision. We broke a raging epidemic of accounting control fraud without new legislation in the period of 1984 through 1986.

Legislation would’ve been helpful, we sought legislation, but we didn’t get it. And we were able to stop that because we didn’t simply consider business as usual.

Lehman’s failure is a story in large part of fraud. And it is fraud that begins at the absolute latest in 2001, and that is with their subprime and liars’ loan operations.

Lehman was the leading purveyor of liars’ loans in the world. For most of this decade, studies of liars’ loans show incidence of fraud of 90%. Lehmans sold this to the world, with reps and warranties that there were no such frauds. If you want to know why we have a global crisis, in large part it is before you. But it hasn’t been discussed today, amazingly.

Financial institution leaders are not engaged in risk when they engage in liars’ loans — liars’ loans will cause a failure. They lose money. The only way to make money is to deceive others by selling bad paper, and that will eventually lead to liability and failure as well.

When people cheat you cannot as a regulator continue business as usual. They go into a different category and you must act completely differently as a regulator. What we’ve gotten instead are sad excuses.

The SEC: we’re told they’re only 24 people in their comprehensive program. Who decided how many people there would be in their comprehensive program? Who decided the staffing? The SEC did. To say that we only had 24 people is not to create an excuse — it’s to give an admission of criminal negligence. Except it’s not criminal, because you’re a federal employee.

In the context of the FDIC, Secretary Geithner testified today that this pushed the financial system to the brink of collapse But Chairman Bernanke testified we sent two people to be on site at Lehman. We sent fifty credit people to the largest savings and loan in America. It had 30 billion in assets. We had a whole lot less staff than the Fed does.

We forced out the CEO. We replaced the CEO. We did that not through regulation but because of our leverage as creditors. Now I ask you, who had more leverage as creditors in 2008? The Fed, as compared to the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, 19 years earlier? Incomprehensible greater leverage in the Fed, and it simply was not used.

Let’s start with the repos. We have known since the Enron in 2001 that this is a common scam, in which every major bank that was approached by Enron agreed to help them deceive creditors and investors by doing these kind of transactions.

And so what happened? There was a proposal in 2004 to stop it. And the regulatory heads — there was an interagency effort — killed it. They came out with something pathetic in 2006, and stalled its implication until 2007, but it ’s meaningless.

We have known for decades that these are frauds. We have known for a decade how to stop them. All of the major regulatory agencies were complicit in that statement, in destroying it. We have a self-fulfilling policy of regulatory failure
because of the leadership in this era.

We have the Fed, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, finding that this is three card monty. Well what would you do, as a regulator, if you knew that one of the largest enterprises in the world, when the nation is on the brink of economic collapse, is engaged in fraud, three card monty? Would you continue business as usual?

That’s what was done. Oh they met a lot — they say “we only had a nuclear stick.” Sounds like a pretty good stick to use, if you’re on the brink of collapse of the system. But that’s not what the Fed has to do. The Fed is a central bank. Central banks for centuries have gotten rid of the heads of financial institutions. The Bank of England does it with a luncheon. The board of directors are invited. They don’t say “no.” They are sat down.

The head of the Bank of England says “we have lost confidence in the head of your enterprise. We believe Mr. Jones would be an effective replacement. And by 4 o’clock that day, Mr. Jones is running the place. And he has a mandate to clean up all the problems.

Instead, every day that Lehman remained under its leadership, the exposure of the American people to loss grew by hundreds of millions of dollars on average. Auroroa was pumping out up to 300 billion dollars a month in liars’ loans. Losses on those are running roughly 50% to 85 cents on the dollar. It is critical not to do business as usual, to change.

We’ve also heard from Secretary Geithner and Chairman Bernanke — we couldn’t deal with these lenders because we had no authority over them. The Fed had unique authority since 1994 under HOEPA to regulate all mortgage lenders. It finally used it in 2008.

They could’ve stopped Aurora. They could’ve stopped the subprime unit of Lehman that was really a liar’s loan place as well as time went by.

(Kanjorski bangs the gavel)

Thank you very much.

[Enthusiast]

73. Thank you, flyarm!

Great stuff, as usual.

[clear eye]

101. Thank you for this eye-opening post. n.t

[bc3000]

62. And when they get dem votes and claim Reid's own party is against it?

what then?

[Enthusiast]

64. Now is the perfect time to

strengthen the bill and enact some controls on the derivatives market.

We have the upper hand. Let's use it.

But then our side would have to stop pretending we want actual tough regulation that would rein in the abuses.

[madokie]

74. If I was Reid I'd make them actually fillibuster

not run when they threaten too. This is serious business here and the pukes are largely responsible for things being the way they are so give them no outs make them work for their pay.

[Wednesdays]

75. So the Repugs kill the bill...America responds with a big yawn...

:shrug:

[dotymed]

77. Can't a "simple majority" pass this bill?

The rethugs used their majority status to pass many of their bills. If "we" (not so much anymore, I want a Progressive party that represents the 95% that are not wealthy), threatened to filibuster, they would threaten the "noo-cle-har option." Why are the Democrats afraid to do this? They won. People want change. We are all tired of the Banksters (definitely the other 95% are), Am I wrong? Can the Democrats pass this with a simple majority vote? 51 not 60..

[No Elephants]

95. Just how simple does this majority have to be?

Okay, it doesn't work without the Groucho eyebrows and cigar.


BTW, I don't think Democrats are afraid. Or simpletons. Please see Replies 79 and 82.

[earcandle]

78. IT s adog and pony show without Glass Stegall back in place. Corruption will not go away.

[No Elephants]

92. Dismantling companies that are too big to fail is gone. And the Fed controls this "consumer pro-

tection? agency. Anything wrong with that picture?

[Blue Owl]

91. Please, nobody remove Harry's backbrace!

Unless he's actually got the spinal fortitude to stick to his guns?

C'mon Harry, don't cave...

[No Elephants]

93. Reid will not cave unless and until his caucus tells him to. Please see Replies 79 and 82.

[Better Believe It]

94. Will Senator Reid permit Republicans to engage in a "procedural filibuster" or will he dare them to

engage in a real "on the Senator floor" filibuster?

Senator Reid had the power to force them to engage in the old traditional filibuster.