The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act vote count

[SHRED]

When you look at the YEAs and NAYs in the Senate, plus the lack of a veto override count, it is a mystery why President Clinton signed this.

Signing this bill has led, in large part, to where we are financially today.
Bill Clinton should be on the stump apologizing daily and doing what he can to fix it.



VOTE DETAILS

YEAs - 54
NAYs - 44



Nay HI Akaka, Daniel D
Nay MT Baucus, Max D
Nay IN Bayh, Evan D
Nay DE Biden, Joseph D
Nay NM Bingaman, Jeff D
Nay CA Boxer, Barbara D
Nay LA Breaux, John D
Nay NV Bryan, Richard D
Nay WV Byrd, Robert D
Nay GA Cleland, J. D
Nay ND Conrad, Kent D
Nay SD Daschle, Thomas D
Nay CT Dodd, Christopher D
Nay ND Dorgan, Byron D
Nay IL Durbin, Richard D
Nay NC Edwards, John D
Nay WI Feingold, Russell D
Nay CA Feinstein, Dianne D
Nay FL Graham, Bob D
Nay IA Harkin, Thomas D
Nay HI Inouye, Daniel D
Nay SD Johnson, Tim D
Nay MA Kennedy, Edward D
Nay NE Kerrey, J. D
Nay MA Kerry, John D
Nay WI Kohl, Herbert D
Nay LA Landrieu, Mary D
Nay NJ Lautenberg, Frank D
Nay VT Leahy, Patrick D
Nay MI Levin, Carl D
Nay CT Lieberman, Joseph D
Nay AR Lincoln, Blanche D
Nay MD Mikulski, Barbara D
Nay NY Moynihan, Daniel D
Nay WA Murray, Patty D
Nay RI Reed, John D
Nay NV Reid, Harry D
Nay VA Robb, Charles D
Nay WV Rockefeller, John D
Nay MD Sarbanes, Paul D
Nay NY Schumer, Charles D
Nay NJ Torricelli, Robert D
Nay MN Wellstone, Paul D
Nay OR Wyden, Ron D
Yea MI Abraham, Spencer R
Yea CO Allard, Wayne R
Yea MO Ashcroft, John R
Yea UT Bennett, Robert R
Yea MO Bond, Christopher R
Yea KS Brownback, Samuel R
Yea KY Bunning, Jim R
Yea MT Burns, Conrad R
Yea CO Campbell, Ben R
Yea RI Chafee, John R
Yea MS Cochran, Thad R
Yea ME Collins, Susan R
Yea GA Coverdell, Paul R
Yea ID Craig, Larry R
Yea ID Crapo, Michael R
Yea OH DeWine, Michael R
Yea NM Domenici, Pete R
Yea WY Enzi, Michael R
Yea TN Frist, William R
Yea WA Gorton, T. R
Yea TX Gramm, Phil R
Yea MN Grams, Rod R
Yea IA Grassley, Charles R
Yea NH Gregg, Judd R
Yea NE Hagel, Charles R
Yea UT Hatch, Orrin R
Yea NC Helms, Jesse R
Yea SC Hollings, Ernest D
Yea AR Hutchinson, Tim Yea TX Hutchison, Kay R
Yea VT Jeffords, James I
Yea AZ Kyl, Jon R
Yea MS Lott, Trent R
Yea IN Lugar, Richard R
Yea FL Mack, Connie R
Yea AZ McCain, John R
Yea KY McConnell, Mitch R
Yea AK Murkowski, Frank R
Yea OK Nickles, Don R
Yea KS Roberts, Pat R
Yea DE Roth, William R
Yea PA Santorum, Richard R
Yea AL Sessions, Jefferson R
Yea AL Shelby, Richard R
Yea NH Smith, Bob R
Yea OR Smith, Gordon R
Yea ME Snowe, Olympia R
Yea PA Specter, Arlen R
Yea AK Stevens, Ted R
Yea WY Thomas, Craig R
Yea TN Thompson, Fred R
Yea SC Thurmond, J. R
Yea OH Voinovich, George R
Yea VA Warner, John R

Not Voting OK Inhofe, James R
Present IL Fitzgerald, Peter R

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105&sort=vote


---

[annabanana]

1. No kidding!.. This is better known as the "kill Glass-Steagall" Act

And, along with NAFTA is among the worst things that Clinton did to us.

[banned from Kos]

2. How did this bill cause millions of mortgages to go bad?

Answer - it didn't.

Read the FCIC report put together last year (led by Democrats) if you want to know what went wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCIC

They nail it. Stop blaming Clinton.

[mmonk]

3. Combining banking with playing the stock and derivative markets

while they come up with new unregulated inventions and CDOs and insure them along with false ratings on quality by ratings agencies.

[banned from Kos]

5. Look - millions of mortgages went sour first

Then, only because of that, MBS/CDO containing those mortgages crashed in value which set off AIG CDS (the insurance) and cost funds to lose billions.

The ROOT CAUSE was bad mortgages - nothing else (except flat wages and a recession)

Now, idiot conservative blame Fannie/Freddie but only 17% of failed mortgages were owned by them. In reality, banks and consumers gorged on overpriced homes for 6-8 years and home values have corrected leaving millions more bagholder consumers with upside-down mortgages.

Countrywide and WaMu did more than anyone else by peddling crappy mortgages in California, Nevada, and Arizona for 10+ years.

[ChandlerJr]

7. "Countrywide and WaMu did more than anyone else"

Which they would never have been able to do without the slice and dice, derivative driven secondary market that sprang up after the repeal of Glass-Stegall!

It's all connected.

[banned from Kos]

8. Untrue. The secondary market is decades old. Who were the main buyers

of their mortgages (other than themselves).

Lehman, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Fannie, and Freddie (all five failed).

None of these five firms were subject to Glass-Steagall. Why? None are commercial bankers.

Glass-Steagall did nothing to prohibit feeder mortgage lenders from supplying Investment banks with mortgages. That is why Dodd-Frank is stronger than G-S.

Now, G-S would have prevented Lehman from BUYING Countrywide or WaMu.

[ChandlerJr]

9. The point is that Glass-Stegall prevented COMMERCIAL banks

from speculating with depositors money in the derivative market for their own profit. There was a wall between commercial and investment banks. The commercial banks felt safe buying slice and diced securitized mortgage investments because depositors money was insured and thus so were the riskier investments.

[sendero]

24. Your cursory understanding of what happened..

... is amusing. You really need to do a lot more study, you are WAY OFF.

[karynnj]

16. It had a part because it gave the financial institutions BILLIONS more to invest

In addition, a second Phil Gramm bill prevented regulations on derivatives and credit swaps. This led to the mortgage consolidators (including Freddie Mac and Frannie Mae - though the private consolidators had even higher defauts) allowing the mortgages they bought to become part of derivatives which were then sold as top grade - AAA investments. This meant the people writing the mortgages did not carry their risk for more than a few weeks. As they continued to be able to sell them, there was no disincentive to writing them.

Without the non regulation of derivatives and the repeal of Glass stegall, any problem in foreclosures would never have come close to the massive problem in 2008.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. I would advise some reading

But I gave up ontat a while ago

[JoePhilly]

25. Gramm goes STRAIGHT to the Board of Directors of UBS after this passes.

All of the big financial companies wanted this. It freed them up to take HUGE risks, break those up, and then combine them with their "good loans".

Sadly, every financial company caught on to the game, and they ALL poisoned the well. The Bush SEC was told to stand down and only enforce the most obvious illegal actions.

The entire idea was to allow the financial giants to bury risky loans. And so they had an incentive to make more and more risky loans because they could simply pass the risk along.

[jmowreader]

26. This bill alone couldn't have done it

The FCIC report was WAY off, because it didn't mention the role of derivatives in the crisis.

The Utne Reader Condensed Version: In 2005, mortgage-backed securities written against subprime loans, and hedged with credit default swaps, became extremely popular. This speculation plan RELIED on massive levels of foreclosure. The only way to ensure foreclosures would occur is to intentionally make loans to people who can't afford the houses, and using very high-pressure sales tactics to get people to sign up for them.

Until we have complete derivatives reform, any "mortgage crisis study" is nothing more than giving the governor a harrumph.

[Selatius]

27. Glass-Steagall prevents a conflict of interest from arising by prohibiting consolidation between ...

Investment banks and commercial banks. Typically, commercial banks are originators of loans, like mortgages. Investment banks can buy the loans from the commercial banks, slice them up into tranches, recombine the tranches into a single security (a mortgage-backed security or MBS) and sell it on the market for a profit.

The problem comes when investment banks buy out commercial banks. Now there is a temptation to push as many loans as possible in order to create more MBS for sale and profit. They will sour later, but the profit has already been booked. Worse yet, the investment bank can buy what amounts to insurance on these MBS called a credit default obligation or CDO from an insuring entity like AIG.

So the investment bank can now make a profit from the sale of MBS, and when some of these MBS go bad somewhere down wind, they can also cash in their CDOs with the insuring entity for money. This is why AIG had to be bailed out, and the banks that crashed were the ones that bought the most MBS thinking they were safe investments, and somewhere along the way, somebody was making a lot of money in this chaos.

[Lasher]

4. Here's how it went down:

The Gramm-Leach- Bliley Act of 1999, which dismantled protections of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) as S. 900 and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA) as H.R. 10. S. 900 was passed along party lines 54-44 in the Senate by http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00105">Roll Call Vote 105 on by May 6, 1999. H.R. 10 passed by a 343-86 bipartisan vote in the House 343-86 on July 1, 1999 by http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1999/roll276.xml">Roll Call Vote 276.

The bill was returned from conference for final votes in both Houses as S. 900. It passed 90-8 in the Senate on November 4, 1999 by http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00354">Roll Call Vote 354 and passed 362-57 on the same day in the House by http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1999/roll570.xml">Roll Call Vote 570.

The Act had bipartisan support in the House from the beginning, but initially passed in the Senate virtually by a party line vote. What happened between May 6, 1999 and November 4, 1999 to convince Senate Democrats to support the bill?

The truth is, Senate Democrats supported the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act">Community Reinvestment Act and address certain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act#">privacy concerns. This is why the bill was veto proof when it went to Clinton. But don’t be too quick to give Clinton a pass on this, since it’s likely that he would have signed the bill anyway. He and Congressional Democrats seemed interested in only these two issues, and were apparently unconcerned about Glass-Steagall Act provisions that prohibited banking speculation and merging of financial services sector businesses.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/13/business/republicans-propose-a-deal-on-financial-services.html">Republicans Propose a Deal on Financial Services - New York Times - October 13, 1999

Nearly all members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, were complicit when the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 met its demise. The same is true of Bill Clinton and his administration.

[elleng]

14. Thanks, Lasher,

Real killer:

'He and Congressional Democrats seemed interested in only these two issues, and were apparently unconcerned about Glass-Steagall Act provisions that prohibited banking speculation and merging of financial services sector businesses.'

[Lasher]

17. There was a time when I naively defended Clinton and Congressional Democrats for this outrage.

Then I decided to do some research and learned the disturbing truth.

Well the good news is, WVU just moved up from #13 to #11. I'm running out of couches to burn.

[elleng]

19. I never bothered defending Clinton, and surely not for supporting ANY gramm bill.

Good WVU UP; they made a mess last week, didn't they? Kind of like Redskins today. ;-( Daughter's at THAT game.

:hi:

[mother earth]

6. It was total "Inside Job"...both sides have been compromised

in gov't because we've got no real campaign finance reform...plain and simple...they are all in bed together, profits galore, in office and later when out of office...the gov't does not represent its people & the foxes are guarding the henhouse. How do you deal with that? You get the corporate thumb out of that grand old taxpayer money pie.

The problem hasn't been big gov't, its no gov't...the gov't has been broken, for a price. CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, ELECTION REFORM, and don't forget to "secure" the vote...liberty's been hacked. When you look back at every step that was compromised along the way...it's easy to see there's a real force behind it all and it somehow keeps going back to that 1%....go figure.

[2banon]

10. Clinton supported this bill and you can bet he & family benefited mightly for that support. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. They're all the same! They're all the same!

:sarcasm:

:eyes:

Some children need to grow the fuck up.

[Lasher]

18. How ironic, that's the most childish post I've seen all day.

Pardon me but we were discussing verifiable facts. Sorry to have interrupted your meaningless tantrum.

[2banon]

12. Chelsea worked for Hedge Fund after undergratuate studies major in medicine

interesting career path following studies in the field of medicine.

[elleng]

13. Yes. There was heavy duty inside politics going on for a long time,

and we'll be suffering for it for maybe a longer time.

[Better Believe It]

15. The Senate vote on repealing the Glass-Steagall Act: 90-8-1 Only 7 Democrats, voted against.

Repeal of the Act

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA) in 1999. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. This veto proof legislation, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

The banking industry had been seeking the repeal of Glass-Steagall since at least the 1980s.

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. Citigroup played a major part in the repeal. Then called Citicorp, the company merged with Travelers Insurance company the year before using loopholes in Glass-Steagall that allowed for temporary exemptions. With lobbying led by Roger Levy, the "finance, insurance and real estate industries together are regularly the largest campaign contributors and biggest spenders on lobbying of all business sectors . They laid out more than $200 million for lobbying in 1998, according to the Center for Responsive Politics..." These industries succeeded in their two decades long effort to repeal the act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


------------------------------------------

Here's how the Senators voted on the final bill that President Clinton signed into law.

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 106th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Conference Report (S.900 Conference Report )
Vote Number: 354 Vote Date: November 4, 1999, 03:30 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Conference Report Agreed to
Measure Number: S. 900
Measure Title: An Act to enhance competition in the financial services industry by providing a prudential framework for the affiliation of banks, securities firms, and other financial service providers, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 90
NAYs 8
Present 1
Not Voting 1

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---90
Abraham (R-MI)
Akaka (D-HI)
Allard (R-CO)
Ashcroft (R-MO)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Breaux (D-LA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Campbell (R-CO)
Chafee, L. (R-RI)
Cleland (D-GA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coverdell (R-GA)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daschle (D-SD)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Edwards (D-NC)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Gorton (R-WA)
Graham (D-FL)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grams (R-MN)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Helms (R-NC)
Hollings (D-SC)
Hutchinson (R-AR)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (R-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerrey (D-NE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Mack (R-FL)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moynihan (D-NY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nickles (R-OK)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Robb (D-VA)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Roth (R-DE)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Smith (R-NH)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Torricelli (D-NJ)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---8
Boxer (D-CA)
Bryan (D-NV)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Shelby (R-AL)
Wellstone (D-MN)

Present - 1
Fitzgerald (R-IL)

Not Voting - 1
McCain (R-AZ)


------------------------------------------

Statements in support of bill that repealed of Glass-Steagall Act



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: CHRISTI HARLAN
Friday, November 12, 1999 202-224-0894

GRAMM'S STATEMENT AT SIGNING CEREMONY
FOR GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT

Sen. Phil Gramm, chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, made the following statement today in a ceremony at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, where President Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act into law:

"The world changes, and Congress and the laws have to change with it.

"Abraham Lincoln used to like to use the analogy that old and outmoded laws need to be changed because it made about as much sense to continue to impose them on people as it did to ask a man to wear the same clothes he did when he was a child.

"In the 1930s, at the trough of the Depression, when Glass-Steagall became law, it was believed that government was the answer. It was believed that stability and growth came from government overriding the functioning of free markets.

"We are here today to repeal Glass-Steagall because we have learned that government is not the answer. We have learned that freedom and competition are the answers. We have learned that we promote economic growth and we promote stability by having competition and freedom.

"I am proud to be here because this is an important bill; it is a deregulatory bill. I believe that that is the wave of the future, and I am awfully proud to have been a part of making it a reality."

-30-

----------------------------------------------

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release November 12, 1999
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT FINANCIAL MODERNIZATION BILL SIGNING

Presidential Hall

1:37 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you and good afternoon. I thank you all for coming to the formal ratification of a truly historic event -- Senator Gramm and Senator Sarbanes have actually agreed on an important issue. (Laughter.) Stay right there, John. (Laughter.) I asked Phil on the way out how bad it's going to hurt him in Texas to be walking out the door with me. (Laughter.) We decided it was all right today.

Like all those before me, I want to express my gratitude to those principally responsible for the success of this legislation. I thank Secretary Summers and the entire team at Treasury, but especially Under Secretary Gensler, for their work, and Assistant Secretary Linda Robertson. I thank you, Chairman Greenspan, for your constant advocacy of the modernization of our financial system. I thank you, Chairman Levitt, for your continuing concern for investor protections. And I thank the other regulators who are here.

I thank Senator Gramm and Senator Sarbanes, Chairman Leach and Congressman LaFalce, and all the members of Congress who are here. Senator Dodd told me the Sisyphus story, too, over and over again, but I've rolled so many rocks up so many hills, I had a hard time fully appreciating the significance of it. (Laughter.)

I do want to thank all the members here and all those who aren't here. And I'd like to thank two New Yorkers who aren't here who have been mentioned -- former Secretary of the Treasury Bob Rubin, who worked very hard on this; and former Chairman, Senator Al D'Amato, who talked to me about this often. So this is a day we can celebrate as an American day.

To try to give some meaning to the comments that the previous speakers have made about how we're making a fundamental and historic change in the way we operate our financial institutions, I think it might be worth pointing out that this morning we got some new evidence on the role of new technologies in our economy, which showed that over the past four years, productivity has increased by a truly remarkable 2.6 percent -- that's about twice the rate of productivity growth the United States experienced in the 1970s and the 1980s. In the last quarter alone, productivity grew at 4.2 percent.

This is not just some aloof statistic that matters only to the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, and Wall Street economists. It is the key to rising paychecks and greater security and opportunity for ordinary Americans. And the combination of rising productivity, more open borders and trade, working to keep down inflation, the dramatic reduction of the deficit and the accumulation of the surplus, and the continued commitment to the investment in the American people, research and development, and new productivity-inducing technologies has given us the most sustained real wage growth in more than two decades, with the lowest inflation in more than three decades.

I can tell you that back in December of 1992, when we were sitting around the table at the Governor's Mansion, trying to decide what had to be in this economic program, the economists that I had there, who are normally thought to be -- you know, you say, well, they're Democrats, they'll be more optimistic -- none of them believed that we could grow the economy for this long with an unemployment rate this low and an inflation rate this low. And it's a real tribute to the American people.

So what you see here, I think, is the most important recent example of our efforts here in Washington to maximize the possibilities of the new information age global economy, while preserving our responsibilities to protect ordinary citizens and to build one nation here. And there will always be competing interests. You heard Senator Gramm characterize this bill as a victory for freedom and free markets. And Congressman LaFalce characterized this bill as a victory for consumer protection. And both of them are right. And I have always believed that one required the other.

It is true that the Glass-Steagall law is no longer appropriate to the economy in which we lived. It worked pretty well for the industrial economy, which was highly organized, much more centralized and much more nationalized than the one in which we operate today. But the world is very different.

Now we have to figure out, well, what are still the individual and family and business equities that are still involved that need some protections. And the long, and often tortured story of this law can be seen as a very stunning specific example of the general challenge that will face lawmakers of both parties, that will face liberals and conservatives, that will face all Americans as we try to make sure that the 21st century economy really works for our country and works for the people who live in it.

So I think you should all be exceedingly proud of yourselves, including being proud of your differences and how you tried to reconcile them. Over the past seven years, we've tried to modernize the economy; and today what we're doing is modernizing the financial services industry, tearing down these antiquated walls and granting banks significant new authority.

This will, first of all, save consumers billions of dollars a year through enhanced competition. It will also protect the rights of consumers. It will guarantee that our financial system will continue to meet the needs of underserved communities -- something that the Vice President and I tried to do through the empowerment zones, the enterprise communities, the community development financial institutions, but something which has been largely done through the private sector and honoring the Community Reinvestment Act.

The legislation I signed today establishes the principles that as we expand the powers of banks, we will expand the reach of that act. In order to take advantage of the new opportunities created by the law, we must first show a satisfactory record of meeting the needs of all the communities the financial institution serves.

I want to thank Senator Sarbanes and Congressman LaFalce for their leadership on the CRA issue. I want to applaud literally hundreds of dedicated community groups all around our country that work so hard to make sure the CRA brings more hope and capital to hard-pressed areas.

The bill I signed today also does, as Congressman Leach says, take significant steps to protect the privacy of our financial transactions. It will give consumers, for the very first time, the right to know if their financial institution intends to share their financial data, and the right to stop private information from being shared with outside institutions.

Like the new medical privacy protections I announced two weeks ago, these financial privacy protections have teeth. We granted regulators full enforcement authority and created new penalties to punish abusive practices. But as others have said here, I do not believe that the privacy protections go far enough. I am pleased the act actually instructs the Treasury to study privacy practices in the financial services industry, and to recommend further legislative steps. Today, I'm directing the National Economic Council to work with Treasury and OMB to complete that study and give us a legislative proposal which the Congress can consider next year.

Without restraining the economic potential of new business arrangements, I want to make sure every family has meaningful choices about how their personal information will be shared within corporate conglomerates. We can't allow new opportunities to erode old and fundamental rights.

Despite this concern, I want to say again, this legislation is truly historic. And it indicates what can happen when Republicans and Democrats work together in a spirit of genuine cooperation -- when we understand we may not be able to agree on everything, but we can reconcile our differences once we know what the larger issue is -- how to maximize the opportunities of the American people in a global information age, and still preserve our sense of community and protection for individual rights.

In that same spirit, I hope we will soon complete work on the budget. I hope we will complete work on the Work Incentives Improvement Act, to allow disabled people to go to work -- and I know Senator Gramm has been working with Senator Roth and Senator Jeffords and Senator Moynihan and Senator Kennedy on that.

There are a lot of things we can do once we recognize we're dealing with a big issue over which we ought to have some disagreements, but where we can come together in constructive and honorable compromise to keep pushing our country into the possibilities of the future.

This is a very good day for the United States. Again, I thank all of you for making sure that we have done right by the American people and that we have increased the chances of making the next century an American century. I hope we can continue to focus on the economy and the big questions we will have to deal with revolving around that. I hope we will continue to pay down our debt. I still believe in a global economy. We will maximize the opportunities created by this law if the government is reducing its debt and its claim on available capital. So I hope very much that that will be part of our strategy in the future.

But today we prove that we could deal with the large issue facing our country and every other advanced economy in the world. If we keep dealing with it in other contexts, the future of our children will be very bright, indeed.

Thank you very much. I'd like to ask all the members of Congress to come up here while we sign the bill. Thank you. (Applause.)



President Clinton Signs Repeal of Glass-Steagall

[eridani]

20. That was just the first round, unfortunately. Final version results below

Only 7 Dems and 1 Rep voted against in the end. We were sold out by the bi-partisan majorities in both parties.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-354
Senate:

Nay WI Feingold, Russell
Nay ND Dorgan, Byron
Nay NV Bryan, Richard
Nay MN Wellstone, Paul
Nay MD Mikulski, Barbara
Nay IA Harkin, Thomas
Nay CA Boxer, Barbara
Nay AL Shelby, Richard

Only 7 Dems and 1 Rep voted against in the end. We were sold out by the bi-partisan majorities in both parties.


In the house: 5 Rs voted nay and 52 Ds

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h1999-570

Nay CA-6 Woolsey, Lynn
Nay CA-7 Miller, George
Nay CA-9 Lee, Barbara
Nay CA-15 Campbell, Tom
Nay CA-18 Condit, Gary
Nay CA-29 Waxman, Henry
Nay CA-32 Dixon, Julian
Nay CA-33 Roybal-Allard, Lucille
Nay CA-35 Waters, Maxine
Nay CA-50 Filner, Bob
Nay CO-5 Hefley, Joel
Nay CT-2 Gejdenson, Sam
Nay CT-3 DeLauro, Rosa
Nay FL-5 Thurman, Karen
Nay FL-7 Mica, John
Nay FL-17 Meek, Carrie
Nay FL-23 Hastings, Alcee
Nay GA-4 McKinney, Cynthia
Nay GA-5 Lewis, John
Nay IL-1 Rush, Bobby
Nay IL-2 Jackson, Jesse
Nay IL-3 Lipinski, William
Nay IL-4 Gutierrez, Luis
Nay IL-7 Davis, Danny
Nay IL-9 Schakowsky, Janice
Nay IL-12 Costello, Jerry
Nay IL-17 Evans, Lane
Nay IL-19 Phelps, David
Nay MA-4 Frank, Barney
Nay MA-6 Tierney, John
Nay MA-7 Markey, Edward
Nay MA-8 Capuano, Michael
Nay MI-9 Kildee, Dale
Nay MI-13 Rivers, Lynn
Nay MI-14 Conyers, John
Nay MI-16 Dingell, John
Nay MN-6 Luther, William
Nay MS-5 Taylor, Gene
Nay MO-1 Clay, William
Nay NY-16 Serrano, José
Nay NY-26 Hinchey, Maurice
Nay OH-9 Kaptur, Marcy
Nay OH-10 Kucinich, Dennis
Nay OR-4 DeFazio, Peter
Nay PA-1 Brady, Robert
Nay PA-2 Fattah, Chaka
Nay PA-14 Coyne, William
Nay SC-1 Sanford, Marshall
Nay TX-6 Barton, Joe
Nay TX-11 Edwards, Thomas
Nay TX-28 Rodriguez, Ciro
Nay VT-0 Sanders, Bernard
Nay WA-1 Inslee, Jay
Nay WA-7 McDermott, James
Nay WI-2 Baldwin, Tammy
Nay WI-5 Barrett, Thomas
Nay WI-7 Obey, David

[SHRED]

21. Good catch!

Man...I thought I had it correct.

Sorry about that.


--

[Raksha]

23. K & R, and bookmarked.

It's very important for everyone (me included, of course) to learn exactly how we got into this mess. This is an important thread.