Gettin’ Dogged: Blue Dog Dems Blocking Real Financial Reform
Friday, 11/13/2009 - 11:38 am by Lynn Parramore | 5 Comments
The Nation’s William Greider makes no bones about the fact that the legislation approved by the House Financial Services Committee won’t do much to disarm financial weapons of mass destruction, aka derivatives ( “The Money Man’s Best Friend”). Greider cites the recent testimony of Rob Johnson, Director of Financial Reform at the Roosevelt Institute (the hard-hitting testimony Barney Frank didn’t want you to see):
“The ‘entanglements of derivatives exposures’ among oversize banks ‘is the equivalent of the San Andreas Fault of our financial system,’ veteran financier Robert Johnson testified at an October 7 hearing on the draft bill. If Congress does not disarm derivatives, he warned, it could lead to another cascade of failure that would give regulators no choice but once again to rush to the rescue of the banks dubbed ‘too big to fail.’”
Greider notes that Goldman Sachs is plotting to market a nasty new instrument that will allow banks to reduce the capital requirements for holding risky assets on their balance sheets. How innovative! This is just the sort of monkey business Johnson has been warning about on this blog:
“We hear that getting in the way of new technique may cause more problems than it solves. Or that the innovators can always outrun the regulators. Or, and this is my favorite, that nothing you do to stifle these new derivative products like credit default swaps will (ominous music in the background) lead to “systemic risk.” Systemic risk is the new stun-gun phrase to impart dread to those who would tamper with this delicate machine.
Malarky. This is all code for defer to the wishes of those who make money from these techniques.”
Greider goes on to quote Michael Greenberger, a veteran federal regulator, who believes that the House legislation is so exquisitely riddled with loopholes and exceptions that it appears to have been written by Wall Street lawyers. A Congressional source actually told Greider that the original language was indeed penned financial-industry experts, probably JP Morgan and Goldman, and maybe the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.
Who is behind this travesty? Blue Dog Democrats, fifteen of whom serve on the committee. As Greider puts it, they are “the tail wagging the committe’s older, liberal dogs.” But people who actually want reform are starting to bark, including Richard Trumka, the new prez of the AFL-CIO, who opposes Obama’s plan to make the Fed a super-regulator. He has been articulating what an outraged public senses — that the Fed is a corrupt mess and should not be in charge of anything until it has had a thorough housecleaning.





























































It’s too depressing for words. I’m not sure I trust ANY of our current organs of govt to get the regulatory job done though, honestly. Fed, FDIC, Treasury… is there a single one we can count on? If we create a new body, what can prevent regulatory capture? If this is what we get when Dems are in charge, what hope do we really have in our 2-party country?
Posted by James Call | November 13th, 2009 at 11:57 am
A lie is a pretense of good hiding an intent to be enriched upon your misery. And as those most intelligent have the greatest knowledge of good, not until after the misery do we know what the supremely intelligent rich nobility will do to us next. Unless of course, unless we organize against it of course.
Posted by John Ellis | November 13th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
James - from what I gather, the FDIC would be preferable to the Fed or the Treasury, but I hear you on regulatory capture - it’s daunting. Your comment really gets to the heart of the matter - we don’t just have a financial crisis, we have a political crisis.
John - your comment reminds me so much of things Robert Johnson has written here and said to me. And you’re right about organizing–protesting is good, but organization is the key. The Chicago bank protest should have had a million people marching instead of just a few thousand…
Thanks to both of you for reading.
Lynn Parramore
Editor, New Deal 2.0
Posted by FERI | November 13th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
I would favor the FDIC as well, but even under Bair, who seems relatively tough, the FDIC has caved to demands from the Fed and Treasury. I don’t think any of the institutions are transparent enough to get the job done. I wouldn’t have any problem with even the Fed performing this function, if the Fed were held accountable in the way the executive or legislative branches were. I don’t know, I don’t know where to start. It’s a problem of consciousness as much as it is of government… after all, we’re able to watch what these folks are up to… but most people are not paying attention!
And that’s my whining for the day…
Posted by James Call | November 13th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Not to get sidetracked on another point, but until we call the “Democratic Traitors” instead of Blue Dog, we aren’t calling them out for what they really are. A “Blue Dog” is as much a myth as a “Czar” - they are both lazy vernacular for the news trade.
Posted by NativeSonKY | November 16th, 2009 at 1:26 am