Financial Reform Endgame-By PAUL KRUGMAN

[kpete]

Financial Reform Endgame


By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: February 28, 2010

So here’s the situation. We’ve been through the second-worst financial crisis in the history of the world, and we’ve barely begun to recover: 29 million Americans either can’t find jobs or can’t find full-time work. Yet all momentum for serious banking reform has been lost. The question now seems to be whether we’ll get a watered-down bill or no bill at all. And I hate to say this, but the second option is starting to look preferable. ...

The problem, not too surprisingly, lies in the Senate, and mainly, though not entirely, with Republicans. The House has already passed a fairly strong reform bill, more or less along the lines proposed by the Obama administration, and the Senate could probably do the same if it operated on the principle of majority rule. But it doesn’t — and when you combine near-universal Republican opposition to serious reform with the wavering of some Democrats, prospects look bleak. ...

That said, some Republicans might, just possibly, be persuaded to sign on to a much-weakened version of reform — in particular, one that eliminates a key plank of the Obama administration’s proposals, the creation of a strong, independent agency protecting consumers. Should Democrats accept such a watered-down reform?

I say no.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/opinion/01krugman.html?hp

[Skittles]

1. in other words

Financial reform is soundling a lot like HCR :thumbsdown:

[DJ13]

2. Its like they have a template they use to excuse catering to the corporations

[Skittles]

4. not hard to figure that one out

[depakid]

3. A case where the imperfect (i.e. the good) is the enemy of the responsible and effective

All in all- rather like the empowering insurers in the health care bill, eh Paul?

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. He does explain why he doesn't think it's the same

For health care, any improvement is good, as soon as it happens - it will save lives immediately. For banking, it's a safety net - having something there that's not very good won't necessarily help immediately, but it may make people think the risks are under control, and then they take more risks, and when things go wrong the problems will be greater.

[depakid]

9. I know- I'm just not buying his argument

I agree with the logic re: the financial system- but having seen similar arguments about the current health care bill run astray (NAFTA being among them) it's hard to see how or why further entrenching the health insurers- which are the root cause of most of the problems, makes it likely that they'll be addressed down the line.

That's not to say that I don't grasp the fact that the DINO elements have painted the entire party into a corner with health care- just that there are STILL ways to address some of the issues without passing the self-defeating portions of the corrupted Senate bill.

[xchrom]

5. Recommend

[merh]

6. this seems appropriate

[TomCADem]

7. Once Again, Contrary To Flamers, President Obama Was More Progressive...

Than most members of Congress, including Democrats.