Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

US Senate Stiffs the People, Cheers Wall Street

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
balantz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 05:43 PM
Original message
US Senate Stiffs the People, Cheers Wall Street
Published on Thursday, May 7, 2009 by Creators Syndicate
http://www.creators.com/opinion/jim-hightower/u-s-senate-stiffs-the-people-cheers-wall-street.html

US Senate Stiffs the People, Cheers Wall Street

by Jim Hightower


-clip-

Last week, 45 U.S. senators dodged an excellent chance to do just what Mr. Sam advised. At issue was a straightforward, common-sense amendment proposed by Dick Durbin, D-Ill. It would have allowed bankruptcy judges to help hundreds of thousands of financially strapped homeowners who now find themselves trapped by exploding, exorbitant interest rates that bankers had attached to their loans.

Here was a conspicuous opportunity for even the most ethically blind of our congress-critters to take a principled stand, for Durbin's bill practically had a flashing red-and-yellow neon arrow attached to it, declaring, "Vote Here for the People Against Greedy Bankers."

Actually, even GBs would've benefited, for the bankruptcy provision would have allowed families to stay in their homes and keep making monthly payments to banks (albeit in reduced amounts). Also, banks could still make a profit (though not a killing), and there would be far fewer vacant homes going on the market, thus giving a badly needed break to America's depressed housing market.

What a sensible idea! So, naturally, the Senate stomped it to death.

The members were prodded to do so by Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and other upstanding members of the hyper-aggressive GB lobby. These are, of course, the same banksters who for years speculated rapaciously on people's homes, created a housing bubble that has since burst and shattered our economy, reduced their own financial fiefdoms to insolvency, then rushed to Washington to unscrew the Capitol dome and help themselves to a taxpayer bailout that is nearing $3 trillion.

-clip-

Goldman Sachs alone has more than 30 ex-government officials in its lobbying army, including former House Majority Leader Dick Gephardt and the former top staffer to house banking chairman Barney Frank.

The first and chief target of this furious lobbying blitz was a guy who had long backed the homeowners protection plan, promising again and again last year that he would lead the fight to pass it: Barack Obama. The banker lobbyists were aided in this effort to back off Obama by two White House insiders who have shown themselves to be shameless Wall Street softies - Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and top economic advisor Larry Summers. Timid Timothy reportedly argued that even a small, tightly targeted bankruptcy provision for common folks would create "uncertainty" for big investors in Wall Street banks.

Never mind that millions of homeowners are facing crushing uncertainty over their mortgages, Obama and team promptly disappeared from the legislative fight, abandoning Durbin.

This let Wall Street's hired guns go after pusillanimous, bank-financed Democrats. Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, for example, was a swing vote, counted on by Durbin. But with no pressure from Obama, Bayh was free to sidestep principle and vote his own political pocketbook. Up for re-election next year, Bayh's top campaign donor is Goldman Sachs.

-clip-

"The banks are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill," sighed Sen. Durbin afterward. He added this sobering note: "They frankly own the place."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. "exploding, exorbitant interest rates "
Are you kidding me? Rates are at near all time lows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Read the sentence again.
Pay attention to the verb tense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. What sentence are you
referring to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. "exploding, exorbitant interest rates that bankers had attached to their loans"
That part. The "had attached" part in particular.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. What was "attached" ? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. "interest rates", the subject of your comment. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. The one you referenced.
It would have allowed bankruptcy judges to help hundreds of thousands of financially strapped homeowners who now find themselves trapped by exploding, exorbitant interest rates that bankers had attached to their loans.


The pertinent tense is applied with the words "had attached".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. Were these fixed rate or,
adjustable, or IO loans. If so, they are usually adjusted based on the LIBOR or one of the Treasury rates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. One may assume they were not fixed-rate loans, from what is said.
One may assume they were not ordinary ARMs either, tied directly to treasury rates. It is certainly fair to think that the inflated assessments of property value are a relevant factor too. But I'm not really clear as to what your point is. Whom is that you want to attack or defend here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. When you assume....
I'm not attacking or defending. What is it about DU that advocates an attack or defend mindset?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Well, you certainly did seem to be attacking the statement you cited?
Edited on Fri May-08-09 09:47 PM by bemildred
Or criticizing it. Or something. So let me rephrase, what was your point? What was it about that phrase that annoyed you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. As it ever was.
Very loyal senators. They always stay with the ones who bought them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AdHocSolver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-09-09 03:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
24. Who said, "We have the best Senate money can by."? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-09-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. And corporate money to boot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. We elect them, over and over again. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balantz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-07-09 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. It's so past time to change this dance. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Ya gotta love them - right?
Or is it if we don't vote for them they will go away.

I wouldlove to see run off voting - a candidate has to get at least 45% to win. And if your candidate doesn't come in the top two, you get to choose which of the top two you want your vote to go for.

And if everyone stayed home, no one would get elected -as the 45% of the electorate requirement would be applied.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. People have to understand the importance of primaries and party caucuses.
That's where you weed out the self-serving parasites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. How so? We have had primaries in this country since Day One
Edited on Fri May-08-09 12:48 PM by truedelphi
And it still comes down to Tweedledee or Tweedledum.

One big tent, though different slogans are used to entice members of society to come into that tent. The Dems say things like "Sensible foreign policy. Pro-environment. Women's rights. Good for labor." (Like they care - the sell out in terms of the Democratic Party started with the Clintons and their NAFTA-GATT polciies and the Mexican Bailout that helped their banker buddies)

The Repugs say things like "The right of every precious fetus to be born. The start of sensible immigration policies. Strong national defense."

But in the end, neither party (on the national level) really cares about anything but their Corporate Masters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. But nobody goes. Primary turnout sucks. There is no news coverage.
And yet that is where you can have the greatest say, that is where an insurgent faction in the party with a progressive agenda can get a seat at the table. Why do you think the party hacks hated Howard Dean so much? He started getting the public involved in party politics at the state and local level again, and that is where the party hacks inside the beltway can be taken down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. Self Delete
Edited on Fri May-08-09 10:05 PM by Jakes Progress
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AdHocSolver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-09-09 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #14
23. Excellent post. The party "hacks" suppress progressive people at the grassroots level.
I have seen how this works during the past few years that I have been more involved in politics at the local level.

The state, county, and district party hacks each have their following of "groupies" who merely follow orders. Real progressives who want to bring about significant change are sidelined by the party higher ups by organizing their groupies to suppress the upstarts. The party hacks work to support the incumbents, and suppress new people.

In other words, the primaries are "rigged" to favor incumbents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-09-09 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #23
25. Yeah, I go to the local caucuses.
Edited on Sat May-09-09 08:32 AM by bemildred
You can see that the regulars are just stunned if a couple hundred people show up, and then they get all huffy and worried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-09-09 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #10
27. Instant run off voting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balantz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
12. Kickey poo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonycinla Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
17. Where was Obama?
Where o where was the "peoples president" on this? How about a little arm twisting Mr. President.Read and study how LBJ got results.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

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


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

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

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

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC