Sen. Sanders' "Too Big To Fail" Bill Isn't a Serious Proposal
Senator Bernie Sanders has introduced a bill to break up the "too big to fail" banks. And so, of course, a certain group of liberals are all a-flutter.
atrina vandenHeuvel
✔
@KatrinaNation
Go Bernie-- & drive this into campaign & debates/ Sanders unveils bank breakup legislation http://thehill.com/policy/finance/241211-sanders-unveils-bank-breakup-bill#.VUts4UwZ7kA.twitter …
9:47 AM - 7 May 2015
The Hill @thehill
Sanders unveils bank breakup legislation
“If an institution is too big to fail, it is too big to exist," he said.
View on web
For me, this is one of those moments when I part ways with some of my friends on the left. It's true that the title hits a note that many have been wanting to hear: Too Big To Fail, Too Big To Exist Act. But I have to wonder if any of these folks have actually looked under the hood to see what's actually in the bill. Don't worry, it's not a bunch of long drawn-out legalese. As a matter of fact, in taking on one of the most complex entities in our economy, it's only four pages long.
The bill requires the Treasury Secretary to make a list of "too big to fail" institutions. That's pretty easy because the list already exists as a result of the requirement in Dodd/Frank to identify "Systemically Important Financial Institutions" (SIFI's). And then here's the sum total of what the bill says should be done from there:
snip
If Sanders had been serious, he would have simply announced a re-introduction of Senator Sherrod Brown's SAFE Banking Act. That's because Sen. Brown went to the trouble of actually looking into the issue and crafting a solution to a complex problem.
Read More http://immasmartypants.blogspot.com/2015/05/sen-sanders-too-big-to-fail-bill-isnt.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Your links are so silly.
[url=http://postimg.org/image/ef3z7t8cd/full/][img]
[/img][/url]
[url=http://postimage.org/]free upload pictures[/url]
[url=http://postimg.org/image/82otxz5a5/full/][img]
[/img][/url]
[url=http://postimage.org/app.php]how to do a screenshot on a pc[/url]
[url=http://postimg.org/image/fjy1d6ut9/full/][img]
[/img][/url]
[url=http://postimage.org/]gif image hosting[/url]
[url=http://postimg.org/image/qxkkoe5bx/full/][img]
[/img][/url]
[url=http://postimage.org/]Actually Mary, I find it sad that Sherrod Brown was the sponsor of said legislation, it was already in place.
http://www.brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/brown-introduces-bill-to-end-too-big-to-fail-policies-prevent-mega-banks-from-putting-our-economy-at-risk
Brown Introduces Bill to End "Too Big to Fail" Policies, Prevent Mega-Banks from Putting our Economy at Risk
Legislation Would Eliminate Government Subsidies Enjoyed By Trillion-Dollar Megabanks, Help Community Banks Compete
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
WASHINGTON, D.C. – With the nation’s six largest Wall Street banks controlling assets equal to 64 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) today introduced a bill protect American taxpayers by placing sensible size and leverage limits on our nation’s largest financial institutions. The Safe, Accountable, Fair & Efficient (SAFE) Banking Act of 2012, would hold Wall Street accountable, prevent future bailouts, and protect American homes, jobs, pensions, and businesses.
“As our nation’s economy begins to recover, we must ensure that megabanks cannot take the same kind of risks that hurt so many of our nation’s families and small businesses,” Brown said. “That’s why we need to place sensible size limits on our nation’s large financial institutions and ensure that if banks gamble, they have the resources to cover their losses. The SAFE Banking Act would not only prevent bailouts and protect against economic collapse, it will help Main Street community banks compete with Wall Street megabanks. This will enhance lending to small businesses so that our economy can grow and unemployed Americans can find jobs.”
Brown, Chairman of the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection, will conduct a hearing today entitled, “Is Simpler Better? Limiting Support for Financial Institutions” to examine our nation’s “Too Big to Fail” policies.
Based on legislation Brown introduced in April 2010 with U.S. Sens. Ted Kaufman (D-DE), Robert P. Casey (D-PA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Tom Harkin (D-IA), today’s bill would ensure that banks have the resources to cover their losses.
Specifically, the SAFE Banking Act of 2012:
Mary, I do not like to fight, however, I will call a wrong when I see it.
I took my chances with that one, and managed a LEAVE IT. Phew. 
A-flutter away, you beautiful leftyleftistemotarianpoutragers!
California, Texas, your aversion to the caps key...
You got that right!
but keep telling yourself that. 
But it's upsetting.
I too am for Sanders and I don't have to attack anyone else to support him. 
Thank you much.
The incessant lying and denials of being right-wing were growing very tiresome.
The Third Way was never a grass roots phenomenon. It is and has always been a deliberate, Wall Street-backed infiltration of the Democratic Party.
*
*
*
*
*
*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025246398#post11
"Centrism" to me carries a deliberate connotation of being "in the center"..in other words, not extreme in either direction. Ditto for the word "moderate," which is constantly used to describe Third Way politicians whose policies are anything but moderate in the traditional sense of the word.
Austerity and attacks on safety nets in a country that has already devastated its middle class are opposed by over 80 percent of Americans across party lines, yet these Third Way economic positions are nevertheless described as "centrist," as though they fell in the mainstream of American opinion. Policies coming out of our government now routinely bear little resemblance to what people have repeatedly stated in polls that they want, and neoliberal politicians lie their way through campaigns because they realize how unpopular their positions really are...yet we persist in calling them "centrists."
Secret laws, secret courts, "Kill Lists"/indefinite detention without due process, and mass surveillance in the United States of America are extreme violations of our Constitution and should not be considered "moderate" positions in any sense of the word. They are extreme, even fascistic policies, yet the politicians who espouse them are permitted by us to describe themselves as "moderates."
I think we need to start using the words, "corporatist," "extreme," and even "fascist" to describe what is happening in this country under the corporatist/neoconservative/neoliberal/Third Way agenda. We are witnessing a malignant merger of state and corporations and the active dismantling of important Constitutional protections. The corporate state is pouring our tax dollars into propaganda and marketing for their agenda, and IMO the vast majority of Americans, while aware of their own economic pain, have little understanding of the peril facing our democratic institutions and basic Constitutional protections.
We use words that suggest the current neoliberal and neocon policies are business as usual in America...just another flavor of policies that Americans can trust still fall safely within the boundaries of a democratic, constitutional, representative political system. They are "centrist" or "moderate." But they really aren't...and I think we need to adjust our labels to drive home the seriousness of the crisis we face.
Let's not forget what we are really dealing with. The Third Way was NEVER a grass-roots phenomenon. It is a deliberate, Wall-Street bankrolled infiltration of the Democratic Party.
Their agenda *and* their relentless propaganda are all part of a deliberate, treasonous corporate coup of democracy:
When the DLC connections to the Koch Bros. became well known, they just rebranded the infiltration
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4165556
When you hear "Third Way", think INVESTMENT BANKERS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024127432
GOP Donors and K Street Fuel Third Way’s Advice for the Democratic Party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101680116
The Rightwing Koch Brothers fund the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414
Same companies behind the GOP are behind the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1481121
There are some here who want to run you off of DU.
There are two ways to look at it -
Either they consider you so dangerous and damaging to their cause (their candidate) that they have to resort to alert stalking, name calling, and any other trick they can think of,
OR
They are haters who can't stand to see someone at DU support this President.
Both viewpoints are not mutually exclusive.
In other words, some could feel both ways about you, at the same time.
But, what really gets to them, what bothers them the most, is that you talk about the future with hope and optimism so often.
And that causes them to grind their teeth at night.
This I do know.
I will not sit down and I will not shut up.
I have nieces and nephews also four great niece and nephews. I will do anything to make this a better place for them. Two of them are incredibly strong, talented and beautiful women. I would die for them if need be. There is so much talk here that we need to focus on economic justice and push social justice behind us for now. I have been told this! I say to hell with that 'cause one without the other is meaningless.
I will vote in every damn election, for my candidate or not if they lose. I will always vote for the Democratic candidate. Always. Never a write in.
Some believe I am a stupid Bogger, that is okay. I know I am not. Hell yes, I am going to enjoy the time remaining. He and his family have brought dignity and grace to our White House.
There have been times in my life where I learned your life can change on a dime. So, you know, I cannot and will not live my short life on earth in misery and despair. I have known it, not going to dwell in a dark place.
I am doing my best to make this a better place. Yes, I have hope.
Thank you Major Hogwash~
FYI~ All those 0-7 leaves go to Skinners desk.
Reading this before I hit send. Hmmmmm may make it an OP.
OMG, there will be hell to pay for that one!!!
Why is that?
Could there be another living human being on the other end?
Important issues about PoC. We need that diversity in the debates. No, he never had a chance to win. The media ignored him because they felt he was not a threat. You are right.
I believe Bernie is in it for the same reason.
The reason they hammered Obama is clear. He was gaining strength, people were listening and they feared him. Goddess I loved watching it unfold. I knew, I just knew it was happening. Call it woman's intuition if you like.
A friend of mine, we always met for lunch and a glass of wine the day before the primaries and election. In 2012 she would not come, she was afraid he would lose. Not me, I was confident he would win.
Ha! I was right!
is all that contingent of people are when it comes right down to it.
I part ways with them. I'm too damn old to put up with bullshit
Bernie is the man. he is the real deal. I love him as well as I do my many brothers.
those that hear her remarks in her closed-door briefings can pass them on down to us. Here's her stand on Citizens United according to those who have heard her remarks Our very own resident 1%er posted about it. I think it may be the safest way to campaign. Talk to the wealthy donors in private sessions and then they can pass her words down to us. 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/05/14/hillary-clintons-litmus-test-for-supreme-court-nominees-a-pledge-to-overturn-citizens-united/
From the article
"She got major applause when she said would not name anybody to the Supreme Court unless she has assurances that they would overturn" the decision, said one attendee, who, like others, requested anonymity to describe the private session
Hopefully if she addresses that at her next private session an attendee, who, like the one did in this article may decide to request anonymity to describe the private session for us like they did in this one about Citizens United .
This is an example of consent manufactured by media through repetition, psychological conditioning, and a stable of well paid shills. That is why the GOP wins so often, it's their media.
