HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » The Myth that Obama’s Tak...

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 10:29 PM

The Myth that Obama’s Taking Huge Contributions from Wall Street Was Fine

By William K. Black
April 7, 2016 Bloomington, MN

I am now officially an economic advisor to Senator Sanders, and this column reflects some of that advice. Part of my advice is not to take money from Wall Street felons. (I am not taking credit for Bernie’s decision — at most I supported a decision he had already made over a year ago.) One of the reasons I reinforced Bernie’s decision was witnessing the problems President Obama experienced given his taking very large contributions from Wall Street. I channeled the prescient warning that Professor Thomas Ferguson (U. Mass, Boston) gave a group of us in 2008. He predicted, accurately, that Obama would not lead an effective crackdown on the endemic fraud by Wall Street elites that caused the financial crisis. Tom (he is a personal friend) is the expert on campaign finance. He authored the classic book on campaign finance entitled Golden Rule (as in the observation that he that has the gold makes the rules.).

Tom pointed out that (then) Senator Obama was accomplishing something unprecedented. He was not only raising more money from Wall Street than the Republicans were, he was doing so in the context of a nomination battle with (then) Senator Hillary Clinton. The Clintons were both preeminent leaders of the “New Democrats.” They crafted the coalition of conservative (on economics and national security issues) Democrats. The New Democrat’s apparatus was funded overwhelmingly by Wall Street and President Bill Clinton was famous for championing the three “de’s” – financial deregulation, desupervision, and de facto decriminalization. Even if Wall Street was willing to reverse decades of contributing primarily to Republicans, why would they choose Senator Obama over their great ally, Senator Hillary Clinton? Tom predicted that Obama would win the nomination and the election – and would reject emulating President Roosevelt’s “New Deal” and its transformation of finance. All three predictions proved accurate.

Hillary Clinton’s defense of taking millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street and her extraordinary fees for speeches to Goldman Sachs is that Obama took even more money from Wall Street – indeed, more than anyone has ever taken from Wall Street.

snip* We also need to ask a more fundamental question of Hillary – why? Why with your huge Super PAC funding from Wall Street, your delegate lead, and the criticism you are getting from progressives and will get from independents and Republicans do you continue to take enormous sums from Wall Street felons? It is clearly a liability politically. It blows your cover as a self-describe convert to progressive approaches to regulating (and prosecuting) Wall Street.

remainder in full: http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/04/myth-obamas-taking-huge-contributions-wall-street-fine.html

Banking Expert Who Exposed Savings & Loan Corruption Joins Sanders Campaign
By Reno Berkeley
Crossposted from Inquisitor.com

An expert in banking corruption and finance has joined the Bernie Sanders campaign. William K. Black, an associate professor at the University of Missouri-KC, is Bernie Sanders’ new economic advisor. Black was one of the central figures in exposing and prosecuting corruption in the savings and loan crisis from the late 1980s and mid-1990s. His addition to the Sanders campaign brings important knowledge in laws pertaining to finance and banking.

The savings and loan banking crisis resulted from a multitude of causes, one of which were two laws that helped deregulate them. The Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter. That law allowed credit unions and savings and loans to offer checking deposits, and to charge any loan interest rate they chose.

In 1982, Ronald Reagan furthered the deregulation of savings and loans by signing the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act, which allowed property owners to put real estate into trust accounts to avoid future lawsuits or creditors. Both bills reduced regulatory oversight and by the time the crisis was in full swing in 1995, 1,043 out of 3,234 savings and loan associations had failed due to risky and illegal behavior.

in full: http://www.inquisitr.com/2979022/banking-expert-who-exposed-savings-loan-corruption-joins-sanders-campaign/#AAKVKckTPF0U3RSI.99

20 replies, 2746 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Myth that Obama’s Taking Huge Contributions from Wall Street Was Fine (Original post)
Jefferson23 Apr 2016 OP
think Apr 2016 #1
JayhawkSD Apr 2016 #15
bbgrunt Apr 2016 #2
creeksneakers2 Apr 2016 #3
Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #4
KPN Apr 2016 #6
creeksneakers2 Apr 2016 #20
99th_Monkey Apr 2016 #5
chknltl Apr 2016 #7
MadDAsHell Apr 2016 #8
certainot Apr 2016 #10
elljay Apr 2016 #11
certainot Apr 2016 #9
JDPriestly Apr 2016 #12
Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #13
Nitram Apr 2016 #14
Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #16
Nitram Apr 2016 #17
Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #18
bemildred Apr 2016 #19

Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 10:39 PM

1. Great stuff! So glad William K Black is working woth Bernie!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 10:28 AM

15. Absolutely. Best news I've heard in weeks. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 11:43 PM

2. Wm Black is a great addition to Bernie's team. Everyone should read this!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 11:47 PM

3. Looking at 2008

Obama cleaned up with Wall Street money. However, in 2012, he got almost none. That's because its possible to take money and not be bought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to creeksneakers2 (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 11, 2016, 11:48 PM

4. Alrighty. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to creeksneakers2 (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 12:33 AM

6. Almost none?

Define that please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:50 PM

20. OK

"To understand just how far apart the president and the barons of Wall Street have drifted, consider that as a young senator in his first run for the presidency, Barack Obama took in $16 million from Wall Street donors, while last year, as the incumbent president, he was able to muster only $6 million."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/wall-street-white-house-republicans-lament-of-the-plutocrats-101047#ixzz45eCuuMQx
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 12:33 AM

5. A very timely & important development for Bernie's campaign.

 

Bill Black has both the credibility and the track record to make a YUUUGE contribution
to Bernie's campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 12:34 AM

7. KnR nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 12:55 AM

8. Of course President Obama didn't crackdown on Wall Street, because...

 

...there was nothing in Candidate Obama's executive record (or lack thereof) indicating he would.

This myth of Candidate Obama becoming a progressive President, especially on economic issues, was created by people desperate to "make history" with their votes. They had no idea what his previous record was nor did they care. His Presidency would be "historical" and that's all that mattered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadDAsHell (Reply #8)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 01:39 AM

10. because the left just voted, blogged, tweeted, and whined

$390 mil $ /year /month free to the right to obstruct obama and the left whines that their single abandoned vote didn't count

my comment below applies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadDAsHell (Reply #8)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 01:42 AM

11. Correct

And we can't assume that the Wall Street money went back to Republicans in 2012 because Obama was bad for them- he wasn't. However, they are greedy and know the Rebublicans will be even better than the conservative Dems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 01:34 AM

9. money in politics? rw radio is worth at least 390MIL$/month

FREE to republicans

the biggest enabler of corporate media and politicians is rw radio - and in the biggest mistake in history, the left ignores it.

money in politics?

at a cheap $1000/hr x 15hrs/day x 1200 stations, rw talk radio is worth 4.68 BIL$/ year or 390MIL$ /month FREE for pro republican wall st think tank propaganda and swiftboating — and it’s been accumulating for 25 years.

and for their years of support for 270 limbaugh stations these 90 major universities are legitimate places to protest and probably much more effective, because those protests would cause rw talk radio advertisers all over the country to abandon it more than now and the rw radio psyops would collapse in time to give the dem candidate supermajorities.

americans are going to have to try something different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 02:15 AM

12. K&R. No one can accuse Bernie of not knowing how to break up the banks with William K.

Black on his advisory team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 08:54 AM

13. Exactly, JD. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Original post)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:55 AM

14. Obama is part of an economically conservative coalition?

Obama tried to get the spending bills we needed to provide jobs and jump start the economy but was blocked by CONSERVATIVES in Congress. He supported unemployment payments when the GOP was trying to prematurely end them. He has worked to bolster regulation, not to de-regulate. This all sounds like part of the Sander supporters' mythology of the Man of the People against the big bad rich people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 10:39 AM

16. Man of the people against the big bad rich people....what does that mean?

It should be understood that even Joseph Stiglitz made clear the stimulus
package was not large enough and Bill K Black has been examining corruption
of the financial markets for decades...he is only now on Bernie's team.

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/18/nobel_economist_joseph_stiglitz_on_obamas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 10:55 AM

17. It was clear to all liberals that the stimulus package was woefully inadequate.

Obama wanted to inject a much larger one into the economy but was blocked by an obstructionist congress. But I guess you already knew that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 11:17 AM

18. It was deemed impractical by Obama's guy, Summers..thus the criticism given in this OP

but you're objecting to. That was only one issue, the issue of prosecution of WS
had nothing to do with Obama's economic agenda and again, Black's position is
very different. I could post many criticisms that was public and aimed at Obama
by Democrats, from Gitmo to health care..Bernie was not in any way alone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 12, 2016, 11:22 AM

19. Well, the thing is he would not be there without the banks.

And I have always thought his first job was to make it 8 years, unbesmirched, and by that measure he has done very well.

But he clearly has not taken on the money boys, until now anyway. I think we will see some action this year, Congress has to get re-elected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread