Now are we the only ones in the country that can see this ...The scam

[INdemo]

that should have left execs behind bars but instead left them with millions in bonuses.
Geithner,Paaulson,Summers,Bernanke should all be in jail..right beside Goldman&Sachs execs
This happen while a Democrat was in the White House folks..Now it might have started with the Bush administration but it was Obama that turned his back and allowed this scam to happen.

http//www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/32255149/wall_streets_bailout_hustle/

[FreakinDJ]

1. I fail to see how Geithner, Paaulson, Summers, Bernanke were implicated

The opinion piece rehashed what many of us already know but I didn't see where it implicated the complicity of Geithner,Paaulson,Summers,and Bernanke

[laughingliberal]

7. There are really only 2 scenarios possible here

Either Geithner, Paulson, Summers, Bernanke know about all this and are complicit or they remain duped about it and are incompetent. Neither bodes well for them helping us avoid the next meltdown.

[FreakinDJ]

8. Not buying into the hype - thats all conjecture on your part

[laughingliberal]

9. Okay, please explain how GS, et al continue to run these scams and

there has been nothing done by the economic team. I can only see complicity or incompetence as the explanations for how this is allowed to continue but, perhaps, you can enlighten me to the real story.

[Jakes Progress]

10. Yeah. I'm waiting to hear this answer too.

Oh. K&R too.

[FreakinDJ]

11. Well your "Theory" makes for Great Slam the Democrats Bait

but you have yet to demonstrate any merit to it

[laughingliberal]

12. Kind of a dodge, there

My theory is based on the facts (presumed, I admit) that some of the most best minds in the world of economics sit on the President's team. I can't think of a reasonable explanation for how Wall Street and the banks are continuing to game the system without them stepping in to, at least, alert us to what's going on. I can only surmise it's complicity or incompetence. I invite you to postulate your own theory and provide some evidence for it. My evidence is the game continues and we have heard not a peep out of those who should be on top of it.

[AllentownJake]

13. Stop thinking critically

You are bringing the rest of us down. Do you want the banks to punish us further? Do you want the President to fail?

:sarcasm:

[laughingliberal]

24. Forgive me

Old habits, like critical thinking, die hard.

[AllentownJake]

26. Perhaps I could interest you in some Government reports

With a shiny nice number at the top, and a whole bunch of bad news in the details for you to comfort yourself.

Please remember, the shiny nice number at the top, is what you must focus on.

[FreakinDJ]

14. The "Game" as you say only continues

because the RATpubliCONs are threatening to filibuster the New Wall St Banking Regulations Barney Frank has been working on

Now I'm waiting for your ORIGINAL Accusation to be demonstrated in FULL - How are they complicit in Wall St Banks defrauding the American Tax Payer

You made the accusation - put up, or STFU

[AllentownJake]

16. Barney Frank?

Seriously Barney Frank? :rofl:

If we are going to talk honestly, Barney Frank is a co-conspirator, not someone who wants to get tough on banking.

The minute he was handed that gavel, a lot of cash came with it.

The financial reforms proposed in the fall were weak band-aids. The scary thing is it took Scott Brown winning in Mass before people moved to the moderate category on financial reforms and let Volcker out of the closet they were hiding him in.

[FreakinDJ]

18. and at the same time RATpubliCONs are opposed to any changes

and still advocating to let the "Free Markets regulate the Wall St. Financials" - is that the position you are advocating here?

Have you followed any of the hearings on Cspin, read any of the minutes of the hearings - any thing?

As of yet I'm still waiting to here how they are complicit ..... do you have any thing (nonconjecture) to add?

[AllentownJake]

29. Let me see

We have a group within our party, that waters down regulation to take the reform out, so the President can have a signing ceremony and pretend something was done and they can keep their donations and job prospects for their staff and themselves. They know the right thing to do, because there has been a proven model that worked for 60 years, they just don't have the ability to sacrifice their personal interest (which is what being a public official is all about) to do it.

Than we have an angry party that says no to everything anyone says, because they don't want the signing ceremony.

Morally, I really can't see which one I should be more angry about.

[FreakinDJ]

31. Where is your proof Buddy

no links
no proof

Take your Union Check over to the nearest GOP campaign contribution center and see how far that gets ya

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[AllentownJake]

34. Proof

Prior to Scott Brown's victory, Paul Volcker was not listened to and all his ideas were mentioned as "extreme"

Suddenly Paul Volcker is a pretty bright guy and the administration is listening to him and putting out his proposals.

Wall Street always funds the winner of an election. Not because Wall Street money makes the winner, but because Wall Street wants access to the winner and they fund both sides.

We are talking about people who invented hedging their risk with investments. The more likely you appear to win, the more money they give you.

I think a lot of democrats who thought that they had a funding ally on Wall Street are going to be shocked, shocked! To find that a whole bunch of money has been moved to their opponents campaigns this year, and it isn't because they proposed moderate weak reforms.

[FreakinDJ]

35. Ya "Proof" as opposed to PURE BULLSHIT

having a little trouble processing the request are we ?

[laughingliberal]

37. For someone who continues to demand 'proof' you have offered precious little, yourself

Please explain to us what proposals the administration is pushing to stop this system from continuing. Last I heard they were not even in favor of reinstating Glass Steagall which if you read the RS piece would make perfect sense in light of the problems between the dealings of GS, AGI, and the other Wall Street firms involved in this house of cards. As I recall, the President's take on it was that Glass Steagall existed in a different time. My take on that is it did, indeed, exist in a different time. It existed for decades during which we did not see a meltdown of this magnitude.

[AllentownJake]

38. La la la

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7762165

It appears the federal government is 95% of the mortgage market, now where did those bonuses come from now.

:eyes:

We nationalized the banks 6 months ago, we just let the execs keep their jobs and bonuses and the investors in the banks keep their equity.

Making losses public and making gains private. Now please tell me again how tough on the banking industry we were in 2009.

[FreakinDJ]

41. like these

http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/FinancialReformDiscussionDraftRevised111009.pdf

I'm still waiting for your proof Geithner, Paaulson, Summers, and Bernanke were complicit in the Wall St give away

[AllentownJake]

47. 95% of the mortgages right now are funded by the federal Govt

Geithner, Bernake, and Summers could kill these guys in 30 seconds if they really wanted to.

Now one of two things are happening. Either Ben, Tim, and Larry are stupid and don't realize that when you control the money these guys are getting you can effectively dictate terms to them, or Ben, Tim, and Larry are OK with their behavior.

The entire lending market in this country, is now backed by government institutions these men control, I think that they could dictate terms pretty quickly when one signature on a piece of paper by them would effectively end an institution overnight.

In the game of chicken, I'm betting on Tim, Ben, and Larry and not Lloyd if it is ever decided to be played.

It's like arguing a nation with a squirt gun is holding the country hostage when you have 30 rocket launchers pointed at the guy, and honestly it is pretty laughable.

[FreakinDJ]

50. So if you "Defund Fredie and Fanny" what happens to 75% of homeowners

Don't these institutions guarantee the loans and private banks manage the loans?

I have yet to see a mortgage statement with the "Payee's Address" of Freddy Mac or Fanny Mae

What I see as a systemic problem with Corporations ranging from Cell Phone providers to Mortgage Banks is they are allowed to outsource their collections department and claim "No Responsibility" for their nefarious actions. These are the folks foreclosing on the homes

Additionally Volker's limits on how much Banks could vest their self in any 1 particular market would go a LONG WAY to prevent banks from misappropriating TARP funds. But all of those proposals will be hard fought by the RATpubliCONs

[AllentownJake]

54. You are missing the point

The banks are living off of their origination fees. You don't have to "de-fund" anything.

You simply say to Bank of America or CitiGroup or Wells Fargo.

Listen, we are going to institute the following reforms, because you guys really got us into a terrible mess, you have a choice, you go along or we will move the money into institutions that will play ball.

Trust me, there are plenty of Regional and Community banks that would jump at the change to expand their origination business, and it is quite profitable and there will be suddenly a whole bunch of trained front-line people looking for work! A 2 week disruption at best.

As for Volcker, as I said, it was entertaining to see how he was taken from the basement the day after Scott Brown won.

The collections game is an entirely different issue than what caused this financial mess. That is the vultures that have been set up for dealing with bad decisions and you are correct, they are there to maintain the reputation of the firms that made bad decisions.

[FreakinDJ]

57. What would happen if we just "Cut-out" the middle men

Since the Fanny and Freddy are already carrying the note just allow them to buy up all the rights to the mortgages and issue their own billing statements and policies regarding reorganizing/refinancing home loans

I'll tell you what - the RATpubliCONs and TeaBaggers would go Ape-Shit, screaming Socialism, Government Take over, BIG Government like you have never seen before

What about 2007 before the Dem Super-Majority when we could have bailed out every single Bad Home Loan in America for the paltry sum of $270Billion - then it was "I don't want to Bail-Out the Speculators". Will Gee - they ended up Bailing Out the worst Speculators of ALL - the Wall St. Financials

[AllentownJake]

60. Where did I say cut out the "middleman"

There are plenty of middle men out there. You just choose which "middleman" you use.

There is this lovely bank down the street with about 30 branches I'm sure would love to collect origination fees for underwriting mortgages on behalf of the federal government and since they are so small, I doubt they would object much to the terms the government gives them as long as they are making money on the transaction.

Of course you might have to hire a few more federal workers to implement this, call it part of the stimulus package.

Judging by the move your money campaign, politically, people think small bank good, big bank bad.

:rofl:

[FreakinDJ]

61. Great Idea if it is legal and politically possible

[AllentownJake]

63. Where in the law

Does it state the government has to contract with any particular institution?

I'm assuming like any other consumer, they can pick who they decide to contract with, isn't that what is going on in New Mexico right now?

I'm not that bright, I figured this out within 15 minutes of reading that statistic, don't tell me Tim, Ben, and Larry can't figure that out as well.

[FreakinDJ]

64. You'll have to excuse me - I have to get back to my other job

But I think you'll find the answers in the Laws regulating the formation of Freddie and Fanny - which is a quasi-private/federal relationship to begin with. That also doesn't address political expediency which with the all out assault on health care reform is rather limited right now.

Additionally I think that Freddy and Fanny write like 75% of the loan. The rest is carried by the Bank of origin. This might be the reason Obama proposed additional funds to save home owner's mortgages recently.

But I like your proposals

[AllentownJake]

65. You don't get to 95% from 75%

and the Federal Government is the mortgage market right now.

4 years ago they were 40%

[FreakinDJ]

66. Are you talking "Market Share" or % of Mortgage Securities

All loans require a % of funds to be held in reserve to secure the loan. Obama ordered the Banks to INCREASE that amount which was lowered during the Bush Administration. That was the reason for the TARP funds. To allow banks to reconfigure their reserves.

What I am saying is I beleive (and don't quote me an this because I am running on memory here) Fanny and Freddy cover 75% of the Reserve Funds. Which during the Bush Administration was lowered to 35:1. Again the reason more funds were made available to Fanny and Freddy

[AllentownJake]

67. What I'm saying

Is that 95% of the money that was used to fund a mortgage in the 4th quarter of 2009 had it's origins from the US Treasury.

[FreakinDJ]

69. That would be 72%

In 2009, 72% of home mortgages were bought or guaranteed by the GSEs. Freddie Mac alone helped more than 2.5 million American families own or rent a home.

http://www.freddiemac.com/

Not really sure if your idea is actually feasible by law

No actual guarantees

The FHLMC states, "securities, including any interest, are not guaranteed by, and are not debts or obligations of, the United States or any agency or instrumentality of the United States other than Freddie Mac."<12> The FHLMC and FHLMC securities are not funded or protected by the US Government. FHLMC securities carry no government guarantee of being repaid. This is explicitly stated in the law that authorizes GSEs, on the securities themselves, and in public communications issued by the FHLMC.

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

But as for your assertion members appointed by the Obama administration are some how responsible or by their inaction in fact responsible for the current plight of homeowners facing foreclosure, I don't see their names any where on this list

As of 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac owned or guaranteed about half of the U.S.'s $12 trillion mortgage market.<18> This made both corporations highly susceptible to the subprime mortgage crisis of that year. Ultimately, in July of 2008, the speculation was made reality, when the US government took action to prevent the collapse of both corporations. The Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve took several steps to bolster confidence in the corporations, including extending credit limits, granting both corporations access to Federal Reserve low-interest loans (at similar rates as commercial banks), and potentially allowing the Treasury Department to own stock.<19> This event also renewed calls for stronger regulation of GSEs by the government.

President Bush recommended a significant regulatory overhaul of the housing finance industry in 2003, but many Democrats opposed his plan, fearing that tighter regulation could greatly reduce financing for low-income housing, both low- and high-risk.<20> Bush opposed two other acts of legislation:<21><22> Senate Bill S. 190, the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, which was introduced in the Senate on January 26, 2005, sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel and co-sponsored by Senators Elizabeth Dole and John Sununu. S. 190 was reported out of the Senate Banking Committee on July 28, 2005, but never voted on by the full Senate.

On May 23, 2006, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulator, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, issued the results of a 27 month long investigation.<23>

On May 25, 2006, Senator McCain joined as a co-sponsor to the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (first put forward by Sen. Charles Hagel )<24> where he pointed out that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's regulator reported that profits were "illusions deliberately and systematically created by the company's senior management".<25> However, this regulation too met with opposition from both Democrats and Republicans.<26>

Several Democrats who served as executives of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac include Franklin Raines, former Budget Director for President Clinton and current Housing Policy advisor to Barack Obama, CEO from 1999 to 2004; James Johnson, former aide to Democratic Vice-President Walter Mondale and ex-head of Obama's Vice-Presidential Selection Committee, CEO from 1991 to 1998; and Jamie Gorelick, former Deputy Attorney General to President Clinton, and Vice-Chairman from 1998 to 2003. In his position, Johnson earned an estimated $21 million; Raines earned an estimated $90 million; and Gorelick earned an estimated $26 million.<27> All three top executives were also involved in mortgage-related financial scandals.<28><29>

The top five recipients of campaign contributions from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae during the 1989 to 2008 time period are Christopher Dodd, (D-CT) $133,900, John Kerry, (D-MA) $111,000, Barack Obama, (D-IL) $105,849, Hillary Clinton, (D-NY) $75,550, and Paul Kanjorski,(D-PA) $65,500.<30>. John McCain received $21,550 from these GSEs during this time.<31> Freddie Mac also contributed $250,000 to the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota according to FEC filings <32>. The organizers of the Democratic National Convention have not yet submitted their filings on how much they received from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (the latter of which tends more to support Democratic candidates).<33>

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

AllentownJake

Understandably you have anger althou I believe a portion is misplaced. You need to understand we are actually on the same side on these issues. HOWEVER I have a SERIOUSLY LARGE PROBLEM with Union Members drawing a Union Pay Check and advocating RATpubliCON Talking points.

You would do well arming yourself with factual content and looking a little further into RATpubliCON talking points before reiterating them - any where

[Jakes Progress]

73. Not missing. Dodging. nt

[laughingliberal]

55. 100% Right On!

It is my impression there is a damned lot the administration could do right now to rein the assholes in without Congress having to ask. Yes, we need Congress to act on reforms going forward but the purse strings this administration holds as of now, I think, gives them the authority to act in some fashion to abate some of the worst practices.

[AllentownJake]

56. They can say knock it the fuck off

very quietly but with a firm voice and if it is ignored destroy one institution in 15 minutes by cutting off the funding for mortgage origination to make an example of them and the rest would suddenly be sitting in board rooms discussing which was the best way to genuflect the administration.

Honestly, I fail to see how when you control the money someone is getting, you somehow can't dictate how they act with said money with the threat of not giving them more money.

For God's sake I hear that argument from the RW all the time when it comes to Satelite dishes on households that receive welfare which is a pittance compared to the money these guys are getting.

[FreakinDJ]

58. the RATpubliCONs and TeaBaggers would go Ape-Shit, screaming Socialism

[laughingliberal]

62. So what? So fucking what?

Are we here to make the teabaggers and Republicans happy? Republicans are 20% of the registered voters. Teabaggers are a very small, colorful, and vocal minority. This freaking appeasement of these tiny groups is counterproductive. The problem with these groups is we have not countered the message. The President should have no problem calling them out, telling the American people who is robbing them and putting his foot down and saying it stops now. His poll numbers would shoot up into the stratosphere. It is difficult to speak to the populist anger out there, though, when your solution is to do just enough so we don't upset the banks and Wall Street.

[dixiegrrrrl]

68. Geithner was head of NY FEd which lobbied for

and got the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (alternatively known as Gramm Leach Bliley), which allowed banks to merge with insurance companies and investment houses.

Here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/11/glass-steagall-act-the-se_n_201557.html

and here:

A second law backed by Treasury Secretary Summers in 2000 was an obscure but deadly important Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. That law prevented the responsible US Government regulatory agency, Commodity Futures Trading Corporation (CFTC), from having any oversight over the trading of financial derivatives. The new CFMA law stipulated that so-called Over-the-Counter (OTC) derivatives like Credit Default Swaps, such as those involved in the AIG insurance disaster, (which investor Warren Buffett once called ‘weapons of mass financial destruction’), be free from Government regulation.
At the time Summers was busy opening the floodgates of financial abuse for the Wall Street Money Trust, his assistant was none other than Tim Geithner, the man who today is US Treasury Secretary. Today, Geithner’s old boss, Larry Summers, is President Obama’s chief economic adviser, as head of the White House Economic Council. To have Geithner and Summers responsible for cleaning up the financial mess is tantamount to putting the proverbial fox in to guard the henhouse.
Today five US banks according to data in the just-released Federal Office of Comptroller of the Currency’s Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activity, hold 96% of all US bank derivatives positions in terms of nominal values, and an eye-popping 81% of the total net credit risk exposure in event of default.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/KD03Dj02.html

[NNN0LHI]

19. Barney Frank is a co-conspirator?

Interesting.

Don

[FreakinDJ]

20. Appearently it is Slam the Democrats Day here on DU

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

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

[Raineyb]

72. Pointing out the duplicity of Democrats is not the same as slamming them.

And the Democrats have a lot to take hits for in this economy and especially with how the banks are currently being treated.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[FreakinDJ]

32. Maybe your Union would do better under the RATpubliCONS Leadership

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

BTW: you have any proof yet

[laughingliberal]

28. As well as Melissa Bean (D) IL

who withheld her vote on the reform bill until some nice loopholes she wanted for certain entities were inserted. It left some of the stronger reforms in the bill affecting only about 6 companies in the entire country.

[laughingliberal]

22. If the President's economic team is aware (and I think they are)

and the RATpublicons are the only block to real reform (although they are not, several Democrats in the House inserted huge loopholes in the legislation and are fighting against some of the most effective regulatory policies in the Senate bill) then why are they not out there every day letting the public know what is going on with their money? Would it not make sense that support for reform would rise to a crescendo which could not be ignored if the economic team stood up and told the American people about it.

And my ORIGINAL Accusation was not that they are complicit. What I said is I can only see they are EITHER complicit or incompetent. If they are unaware of the continuation of the gaming, that would be incompetent. Not alerting people to the continued abuses, if they are aware, would fall under complicit and incompetent. Complicit in that it allows the game to continue, incompetent in that making a stink about it would be the way to force legislators to respond to the crisis by putting some legislative screws to ALL the players in the House and Senate. There would be no better way to co-opt the populist anger in the country right now than to let people know how Wall Street continues to game the system with our money. Instead, we hear how the economy is improving and not a peep about the next bubble now building and we let the teabaggers, with their corporate friendly policy wishlist, co-opt the populist anger. Once again, we hold all the cards and refuse to play them, preferring to fold with Aces to the guys holding 8's.

[FreakinDJ]

27. All that after Bush's 3 page - $700Billion Bill

and yes even Nancy Pelosi has admitted more oversight/regulatory guide lines should been in the bill that was finally passed. But as the "Too Big to Fail" Wall St. Financials held the World's Economy hostage time was a critical factor. Countries such as China who was holding an estimated $500Billion of the toxic assets was threatening to pull the plug on the dollar

Crystal Clear Hindsight in no way proves any thing near complicity. You really should follow more of the hearings to see what is really going on. I often times have Cspin on while I'm reading at DU - it keeps things in perspective

[AllentownJake]

30. TARP was a small percentage of bailout money

Everyone who reads on this issue understand that.

[laughingliberal]

36. True

Just from my limited reading on it, I see there has been more like $2 trillion transferred to the financial institutions and I am assuming this is not the full story.

[AllentownJake]

39. It keeps getting bigger and bigger

Yesterday I found out in the 4th quarter the entire mortgage market with the exception of 5% is the Federal Government.

Now tell me again what useful societal function are the banks providing right now that demands their executives get big bonuses?

[laughingliberal]

42. What useful societal function the banks provide that demands bonuses for their executives...

There's the $2 trillion question. And why is the Obama administration not standing up every day and calling these crooks to task. And why do they keep giving them more money to 'pretend' to help solve the foreclosure crisis? Just why are they not using the biggest weapon in the arsenal-the public's anger at the institutions to, finally, rein these guys in and get us back on a 'real economy' footing?

[AllentownJake]

43. Simple answer

I think they are afraid of them, which is funny when you are supplying the money to them for all their operations.

:rofl:

[FreakinDJ]

45. Better yet

Why are CEOs and Board Directors allowed to reap HUGE compensation packages that completely WIPE OUT annual profits?

I saw the hearings addressing that very subject - and yes the RATpubliCONs objected in mass to any sort of regulations to prevent that

[laughingliberal]

51. And many Democrats object to regulations to prevent it, too

It's easy to blame the Republicans. But we have voted them out en masse in 2 election cycles. It is encumbent on the Democrats now to to pass legislation to correct this. And the President has the biggest megaphone in the world and should be out there with his team every day letting the public know how they have been and are being screwed by the crooks. And they should call out the obstructionists in both parties. Enough heat from the public can move the most bought off legislators. It's up to the President, at this point, to turn up the heat.

[FreakinDJ]

53. Who is running against the Blue-Dogs beside RATpubliCONs

ya I would like to see more progressive democrats on the Hill - But I still remember DRIP (Don't Re-elect Incumbent Politicians) of 1994 which was a HUGE success for RATpubliCONs

Sure RATpubliCONs and TeaBAGGERS alike will try to tell you it is not a partisan politics game just like they did in 1994

Here is some information on DRIP from FreepTard Land

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1848189/posts

[laughingliberal]

59. There are only a couple of Blue Dogs being primaried by progressives

Interestingly, the White House is, by and large, backing the Blue Dogs. That causes me to question their commitment to progressive policy.

I have, absolutely, no interest in what free republic is up to. It is obvious that anti incumbent sentiment is rampant right now. And, rightfully so, IMO. We have had majorities the Republicans only dream about and have failed to put into place solutions to this economic mess that would have insured us retaining our majorities. There was a clear roadmap out of this mess both in policy and messaging. FDR mapped out the solutions in the 30's. It was the repeal of protections put in place in that era that led to this mess. The answer was right there. Reregulate the institutions and stand up and tell the Republicans and the Blue Dogs you welcome their anger and hatred because it means you are standing for the people against the powerful. That would do it. But it is impossible to put any moral indignation behind a message like that when your economic team is trying to straddle the line and keep playing footsies with the crooks.

[laughingliberal]

33. It is obvious to everyone the Bush TARP bill was a disaster, as implemented.

The question, now, is why have WE done nothing to shut down the casino? Of course, the Republicans oppose any reform. That is a given and, I would think, well known in advance of taking office. But why are the Democrats weakening reform with every stroke of the pen? The Republicans are not alone in supporting the crooks.

And I am still waiting for an explanation of the Christmas Eve gift to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae in order to avoid the need for Congressional approval. It seems popular, among some here, to blame Congress for the lack of action (and they certainly deserve their share of it) but, here, we see a huge giveaway, again, to financial institutions who have not acted in our best interest without allowing Congress their role in it. WTF was up with that?

[FreakinDJ]

40. The Reforms as proposed by Committee will go a LONG WAY

to prevent this from ever happening again

Bold Proposal to Create a Sound Economic Foundation to Grow Jobs, Protect Consumers, Rein in Wall Street, End Too Big to Fail, Prevent Another Financial Crisis

WASHINGTON –Today Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) was joined by fellow committee members Jack Reed (D-RI), Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI), Jon Tester (D-MT), Mark Warner (D-VA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Michael Bennet (D-CO) to unveil a tough, bold bill to reform the way that our financial system is regulated.

“It is the job of this Congress to restore responsibility and accountability in our financial system to give Americans confidence that there is a system in place that works for and protects them,” Dodd said at the press conference. “We must create a sound foundation to grow the economy and create jobs.”

“The financial crisis exposed a financial regulatory structure that was the product of historic accident, created piece by piece over decades with little thought given to how it would function as a whole, and unable to prevent threats to our economic security.”

“This is a thorough and carefully constructed plan. It will promote innovation and job creation while protecting consumers and our economy as a whole from another crisis like the one we are now in. I look forward to the continued input and cooperation of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle.”

http://banking.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=df7bf893-bb40-6970-cd5f-c75f56d0fb64

President Barack Obama has laid out his administration’s plan to avoid future economic crises by reforming the US financial regulatory system.

He said the sweeping overhaul would mean a transformation on a scale not seen since the reforms that followed the Great Depression of the 1930s: “With the reforms we are proposing today, we seek to put in place rules that will allow our markets to promote innovation while discouraging abuse. We seek to create a framework in which markets can function freely and fairly, without the fragility in which normal business cycles bring the risk of financial collapse; a system that works for businesses and consumers.” The proposals include expanding the role of the Treasury Department. In an attempt to restore investor confidence, there will be tighter oversight of the biggest financial firms whose excessive risk-taking triggered the global recession. However the much criticised Office of Thrift Supervision, which has been overseeing stricken companies like mega-insurer American International Group and various failed lenders, would be closed down in order to streamline bank supervision. The US central bank, the Federal Reserve, would get new powers and be put in charge of monitoring the largest US financial firms. The hope is that holding one agency accountable will prevent a repeat of the severe banking and capital markets crisis that has battered economies around the world. The plan also calls for the establishment of an independent consumer financial products watchdog agency to regulate mortgage and credit card lenders and to prevent things like sub-prime loans. Obama wants everything in place by year’s end but that could be difficult given opposition in the US Congress.

http://www.euronews.net/2009/06/17/us-bank-reforms-unveiled/

[laughingliberal]

44. Try this:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?articleId=32831

and the Senate Blue Dogs are not through with their weakening of the bill, yet.

[FreakinDJ]

46. Yes we are talking "Some Blue-Dogs"

There's really only one reason Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank backed down from a fight with Melissa Bean, handing business a key victory in the banking reform bill.

"Frank realized she had the votes," says financial industry lobbyist Jeff Peck. "They really tried to get her to capitulate, but she hit a home run because she stuck to her guns. That's a watershed moment for a legislator."

Were not talking about Obama's Administration or the whole Democratic Party here.

So since you feel so strongly on this issue, how many letters, phone calls have you made to your Senators / Congressional Reps ?

[AllentownJake]

48. Congress Critters don't respond to letters

I thought HCR might have taught us that. They respond to donations and electoral victories/losses.

Funding a fielding a primary opponent is a much more effective form of action than a strongly worded letter.

[FreakinDJ]

52. Taught me phoning my Senator's office helps

Feinstien now supports the Public Option

[laughingliberal]

49. I write the White House and my Senator, Harry Reid, so often I'm probably on a stalker watch list

I still contend if the administration's economic team was serious about reforming this system, they would be out almost daily calling out the Banksters and Wall Street thugs and the obstructionists to reform in both parties. A huge outcry from the public will move legislation when nothing else will. Instead, we are hearing pretty words about the recovery and little about the fact that the abuses continue unabated. President Obama comes out, occasionally, and has a few stern words about the bankers, calls them 'fat cats.' The banking industry whines and threatens to send their campaign contributions to Republicans and that's the last we hear for a while. Why would they not alert the public to the fact that Wall Street continues to game the system? Why would they participate in the illusion that Wall Street is making a comeback when it is clear we are in the process of expanding the next bubble? I hear the President say he wants reform so 'this can never happen again.' How about telling the public it is going on again right now and we need to stop it?

[Raineyb]

71. In other words you have no answer? n/t

[DrDan]

2. this post reads like the scam was in the past . . .

instead of continuing

[vegiegals]

3. I do not know what it will take for Congress, the WH and many people

to see what is happening. It just goes on and on. I (we) can be outraged, yet nothing happens (except the fat cats get richer at our expense).

[polichick]

4. Great piece - k&r...

The administration has dirty hands - how can it not with Geithner and Summers aboard, and a president who pulled for Bernanke?

Makes you wonder which, if any, Dem would actually stand up to this if he or she were in the WH.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

5. Taibbi takes no prisoners.....again.

But nobody seems to notice...nobody seems to care...

In an economy as horrible as ours, with every factory town between New York and Los Angeles looking like those hollowed-out ghost ships we see on History Channel documentaries like Shipwrecks of the Great Lakes, where in the hell did Wall Street's eye-popping profits come from, exactly? Did Goldman go from bailout city to $13.4 billion in the black because, as Blankfein suggests, its "performance" was just that awesome? A year and a half after they were minutes away from bankruptcy, how are these assholes not only back on their feet again, but hauling in bonuses at the same rate they were during the bubble?

The answer to that question is basically twofold: They raped the taxpayer, and they raped their clients.

[AllentownJake]

15. If Bin Laden really wanted to destroy America

He should have gotten a Harvard MBA. He'd be much more successful in destruction, and he wouldn't have to hide out in a cave with goats. He could live on an opulent estate and have whatever he wants.

[laughingliberal]

6. K & R nt

[mmonk]

17. Yes, populist liberals are the few that get it.

[whyverne]

21. No, Obama isn't that much worried about it happening again.

Because he isn't sure how we're going to get out of this one. That would be like having a meeting on the Titantic after it hits the iceberg to discuss how to prevent it happening again.

The world is bankrupt. If everyone in the world paid every penny they made for the next ten years towards debt, it wouldn't eliminate it.

Obama sticks with the good old boys because they know how to hide the toxic stuff.

Yes, IMHO; We can't handle the truth!

[Greyhound]

70. The economy must be tough, the banksters only have one defender today. n/t