STATEMENT FROM THE PRESIDENT PRAISING HOUSE PASSAGE OF...THE CREDIT CARDHOLDERS’ BILL OF RIGHTS

[ProSense]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 30, 2009

STATEMENT FROM THE PRESIDENT PRAISING HOUSE PASSAGE OF H.R.627, THE CREDIT CARDHOLDERS’ BILL OF RIGHTS

Today, under the leadership of Representatives Barney Frank, Carolyn Maloney, and Luis Gutierrez, members of both parties in the House of Representatives came together to protect American consumers, paving the way toward real, meaningful credit card reform. While Americans have a responsibility to live within their means and pay what they owe, credit card companies have a responsibility to set rules that are fair and transparent. The principles I have long supported would help ensure that these responsibilities are met: strong and reliable consumer protections; credit card forms and statements that have plain language in plain sight; tools that can help people make an informed choice about what credit card to use; and beefed up monitoring, enforcement, and penalties. And building on what we have achieved today, I will work with Congress in the weeks to come so that I can sign a credit card reform bill into law that upholds these principles and upholds the interests of the American people.

[pleah]

1. K&R

[Fresh_Start]

2. its it more or less the same as the UDAP reg

published last December?

[flpoljunkie]

3. If passed, it won't go into effect until July, 2010--unless banks continue to take advantage of

consumers--so says Barney Frank. We will see.

[depakid]

4. "unless banks continue to take advantage of "

:rofl:

Democrats manage to screw up even the simplest, most popular and straightforward legislation.

Now, had this been legislation to brazenly protect or immunize corporate interests and abuses- it would have gone into effect almost immediately.

[flpoljunkie]

6. Exactly! Congress once again puts the special interests over the public interests.

Surprise, surprise, surprise!

[yy4me]

5. It should start Now, not 2010. They have over a year to play

around with CC users. Can anyone give me a reason that this reform should not be immediate?

[Better Believe It]

7. Nice attempt at a diversion from the bankruptcy bill being voted down

President Barack Obama had said the bill was important to saving the economy and promised to push for its passage. But facing stiff opposition from banks, Obama did little to lean on lawmakers who worried it might spike interest rates.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30503750

-----------------------------
In February, the newly inaugurated president included the proposal as the stick in a housing plan full of carrots for the banking industry. The broader rescue plan encouraged, but did not require, lenders to cut homeowners' monthly payments and refinance loans for individuals whose home's market value has sunk below what they owe.

But the bankruptcy option got only a tepid endorsement from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. As debate on the measure brewed, Geithner was pushing for the creation of a government-sponsored program that would rely on private investors to buy the risky mortgage-backed securities weighing down the market.

In recent days, as it became clear the bill would fail, the administration did little to counter the aggressive lobbying by banks fighting the bill and focused its efforts instead on a more popular bill targeting credit card companies.

Spokeswomen at the Treasury Department and White House did not respond to requests for comment, and absent from the debate was any statement of administration policy.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Senate-defeats-Obamabacke...

[ProSense]

8. .

:rofl:

[Better Believe It]

10. No comment from the White House on the defeat of the bankruptcy bill

Do you also find that to be hysterically funny Prosense?

Ho .... Ho .... Ho ....

Not funny. Especially for millions who will now be evicted from their homes.

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

In February, the newly inaugurated president included the proposal as the stick in a housing plan full of carrots for the banking industry. The broader rescue plan encouraged, but did not require, lenders to cut homeowners' monthly payments and refinance loans for individuals whose home's market value has sunk below what they owe.

But the bankruptcy option got only a tepid endorsement from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. As debate on the measure brewed, Geithner was pushing for the creation of a government-sponsored program that would rely on private investors to buy the risky mortgage-backed securities weighing down the market.

In recent days, as it became clear the bill would fail, the administration did little to counter the aggressive lobbying by banks fighting the bill and focused its efforts instead on a more popular bill targeting credit card companies.

Spokeswomen at the Treasury Department and White House did not respond to requests for comment, and absent from the debate was any statement of administration policy.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Senate-defeats-Obamabacke...

[namahage]

11. Nope. Bill's still alive and kicking.

It's just the Durbin AMENDMENT that failed.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SN896:

[quiller4]

17. And the Durbin amendment was only one of several

presented dealing with a cram-down provision. This issue is still alive.

[ProSense]

13. The laughter was directed the title of the response.

You see: the legislation in the OP also helps people. I hope the Senate passes it.

It's silly to cast the House passage of the credit card bill as a distraction.

[Better Believe It]

15. Compared to the bankruptcy bill is pretty minor legislation that Wall Street can live with

That's my major point. And I would not be surprised if some politicians thought this was a good time to have the House pass this because it would cause limited distract some people (not DU'ers of course) away from the defeat of the bankruptcy bill.

However, why do you think the President Obama issued a glowing public statement praising the House passage of a less significant bill while remaining on the same day dead silent on a much more important bill that lost in the Senate? Of course, if President Obama didn't campaign hard for the bankruptcy bill for fear of alienating Wall Street that would explain his silence.

Perhaps you have a better explanation for this disastrous Senate and White House failure.

Do you think 60 Senate votes can be obtained to prevent a so-called Republican filibuster on the credit card bill and EFCA?

A bigger question is do the Republicans only have to threaten a filibuster to block legislation?

It appears that Senator Reid will only bring legislation for a vote on the Senate floor if he is convinced it will be defeated, like the bankruptcy bill.

And if more than 50 votes are assured for passage of a bill, Senator Reid will not introduce it because the Republicans threaten a filibuster!

Do you detect this possible pattern developing for the rest of this year and beyond?

[Cha]

12. Fuck paranoia , everything has an

ulterior motive to you.

[Kdillard]

9. kick. Hopefully this leads to real reform beneficial to credit card holders.

[wisteria]

14. Frankly, I don't think this bill does enough to help consumers.

And, most of the reforms do not go into effect until next year.

[Better Believe It]

16. So you think people need help now? To hell with them!

They can wait till next year .... if .... and this is a big if .... if it passes the Senate.

Oh .... but the Republicans might threaten a fake phantom filibuster! That will be time to wave another white flag of surrender.


Oh well, if we can elect 80 or 90 Democrats to the Senate we'll get some pretty good progressive legislation passed in 2012 .... or maybe 2016 .... would you believe 2036?