Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reuters: Voting Begins In Senate on Wall Street Reform

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:55 AM
Original message
Reuters: Voting Begins In Senate on Wall Street Reform
(It should be very instructive which amendments Dem leaders decide will need either 50 or 60 votes. I would think Bernie Sanders, Ted Kaufman and Sherrod Brown will be particularly interested in their decisions.)
Voting begins in Senate on Wall Street reform

By Kevin Drawbaugh
Tue May 4, 12:37 am ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate will cast its first votes on Tuesday on a sweeping Wall Street reform bill, with passage of a handful of uncontroversial amendments expected and a key procedural question still unsettled.

Democratic leaders had not yet determined as of late Monday whether amendments will need 50 or 60 votes to pass. The difference is important because Democrats control 59 votes in the 100-member chamber, versus the Republicans' 41 votes.

A 60-vote rule would make winning passage for any amendment -- and there are more than 100 circulating -- more difficult, while a 50-vote rule would open the way to all sorts of proposals from both Democrats and Republicans.

A spokesman for Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said that no decision had been reached and that votes would be handled on a case-by-case basis for the time being.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100504/bs_nm/us_financial_regulation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. Reid just said he'd like to see a 50 vote rule on amendments. Apparently, R's must agree.
We will soon see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
2. Senator Ted Kaufman now speaking on 'Too Big To Fail: Too Big'
Edited on Tue May-04-10 09:31 AM by flpoljunkie
He and Sherrod Brown would like to have their SAFE Banking Act voted on, but rumor is it will not be allowed a vote.

Kaufman is speaking passionately--talking about Alan Greenspan and warning that if we do not fix 'Too Big To Fail' we will be looking at another banking crisis in ten years.

Sherrod Brown now has the floor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
web978 Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. Be nice if it passed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
4. So, if I'm understanding this correctly, this bill will specifically
address the derivatives market. Is there any news on re-instating Glass Steagall?? Then, Durbin gets up talking about immigration reform and Arizona! McConnell talked about getting money for KY. for flood and other such emergencies (surprise surprise).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Senate still on General Speeches. Don't know yet if either SAFE or Glass Steagall will get a vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
5. Lamar Alexander: "Is there a Washington takeover of Main Street Lending? Luntz new meme?
What about this 'czar or czarina' of the Consumer financial Protection Agency? They will be unaccountable to Congress! (Let's hope so! R's, if in the majority, would try and gut it!)

Why are we not dealing with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? (They will be reformed in separate legislation.)

Derivatives are 'complicated.' Lamar says this legislation would be less regulation for derivatives. (Kinda doubt that's the case.)

Of course, Lamar began by basically saying we don't need no stinkin' bank reform. We need to focus on jobs. (We can do both, Lamar! Will your party help or, as usual. try to block whatever the Dems propose?)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
7. Corker says folks in Tennessee very 'concerned' about the reach of the CFPA. Wouldn't want people
to be protected from pay day lenders and other predatory lenders, now would we?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
8. K and R. Dems better not mess this up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
9. we should be able to tell who the Democratic Party really
stands with after this.

Main Street or Wall Street.

I'm not very optimistic, myself. I think this entire exercise is nothing more than a dog and pony show, with no real reform coming out of it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Will it help prospects for strong bill Wall Street money largely going to R's this last quarter?
Are we a plutocracy or a democracy? We will soon see.

BILL MOYERS: You've no doubt figured out my bias by now. I've hardly kept it a secret. In this regard, I take my cue from the late Edward R. Murrow, the Moses of broadcast news.

Ed Murrow told his generation of journalists bias is okay as long as you don't try to hide it. So here, one more time, is mine: plutocracy and democracy don't mix. Plutocracy, the rule of the rich, political power controlled by the wealthy.

Plutocracy is not an American word but it's become an American phenomenon. Back in the fall of 2005, the Wall Street giant Citigroup even coined a variation on it, plutonomy, an economic system where the privileged few make sure the rich get richer with government on their side. By the next spring, Citigroup decided the time had come to publicly "bang the drum on plutonomy."

And bang they did, with an "equity strategy" for their investors, entitled, "Revisiting Plutonomy: The Rich Getting Richer." Here are some excerpts:

"Asset booms, a rising profit share and favorable treatment by market-friendly governments have allowed the rich to prosper... take an increasing share of income and wealth over the last 20 years..."

"...the top 10%, particularly the top 1% of the US-- the plutonomists in our parlance-- have benefited disproportionately from the recent productivity surge in the US... from globalization and the productivity boom, at the relative expense of labor."

"...(and they) are likely to get even wealthier in the coming years. the dynamics of plutonomy are still intact."

And so they were, before the great collapse of 2008. And so they are, today, after the fall. While millions of people have lost their jobs, their homes, and their savings, the plutonomists are doing just fine. In some cases, even better, thanks to our bailout of the big banks which meant record profits and record bonuses for Wall Street.

Now why is this? Because over the past 30 years the plutocrats, or plutonomists — choose your poison — have used their vastly increased wealth to capture the flag and assure the government does their bidding. Remember that Citigroup reference to "market-friendly governments" on their side? It hasn't mattered which party has been in power — government has done Wall Street's bidding.

Don't blame the lobbyists, by the way; they are simply the mules of politics, delivering the drug of choice to a political class addicted to cash — what polite circles call "campaign contributions" and Tony Soprano would call "protection."

This marriage of money and politics has produced an America of gross inequality at the top and low social mobility at the bottom, with little but anxiety and dread in between, as middle class Americans feel the ground falling out from under their feet. According to a study from the Pew Research Center last month, nine out of ten Americans give our national economy a negative rating. Eight out of ten report difficulty finding jobs in their communities, and seven out of ten say they experienced job-related or financial problems over the past year.

So it is that like those populists of that earlier era, millions of Americans have awakened to a sobering reality: they live in a plutocracy, where they are disposable. Then, the remedy was a popular insurgency that ignited the spark of democracy.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04302010/transcript5.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. "This marriage of money and politics"
"This marriage of money and politics has produced an America of gross inequality at the top and low social mobility at the bottom, with little but anxiety and dread in between, as middle class Americans feel the ground falling out from under their feet. According to a study from the Pew Research Center last month, nine out of ten Americans give our national economy a negative rating. Eight out of ten report difficulty finding jobs in their communities, and seven out of ten say they experienced job-related or financial problems over the past year."

This country is ready for change - now all we need is a leader and a political party ready to take that challenge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
11. Republicans will filibuster. This bill is stopped. The party of No does not care
about helping consumers and investors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
13. NYT: Key Amendments to S.3217, Senate Financial Regulatory Bill
Key Amendments to S.3217, Senate Financial Regulatory Bill

The Senate is currently debating legislation that would call for the farthest reaching overhaul of financial regulation since the Great Depression. The House, mainly along party lines, passed a similar overhaul bill in December. The New York Times has highlighted some of the bill's 55 amendments below.

Link to amendments:

http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/bills/111/s3217/amendments
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
14. Bernie Sanders speaking now on the Senate floor on auditing the Fed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
15. Senators have begun voting on amendments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Senate votes to ban taxpayer money to bail out financial firms
Edited on Wed May-05-10 03:48 PM by flpoljunkie
(Boxer's amendment passed 96-1 and Shelby's amendment to give the FDIC the power to liquidate big banks passed 93-5.)
Senate votes to ban taxpayer money to bail out financial firms
REUTERS

May 05, 2010 16:04 EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Senate on Wednesday approved an amendment to a sweeping Wall Street reform bill that would prohibit the use of taxpayer funds to bail out financial institutions. It was the bill's first amendment.

Offered by Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, the measure underscored wide agreement in Congress that the massive Bush administration bailouts in 2008 of firms such as AIG, Citigroup and Bank of America should not be repeated.

A related and more controversial amendment -- one that would set up a new 'orderly liquidation' process for the government to seize and dismantle troubled financial giants -- was expected to come to a vote shortly in the Senate.

(Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh, Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2010/05/senate_votes_to_ban_taxpayer_money_to_bail_out_fin.php?ref=fpa
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC