Senate Republicans holding up Financial Reforms: So what's new.

GOP Senators are holding up passage of the Financial reform Bill worked on since the markets tanked. They continue to do the bidding of their masters, Corporations and specifically the lobbying efforts of big Banks. Republicans argue that we have enough Financial reform and we don't need more as they say this restricts the flow of capital. And their problem with that is what? I thought that is how we got in trouble in the first place. We had unregulated, unfeathered gambling on Wall Street causing $65 Trillion dollars in risky Derivatives and caused Banks to promote bad Sub Prime loans.

We are seeing the same political antics we have seen on every other piece of legislation since the election of President Obama. The Democrats want financial reform, so they proposed legislation in the Banking and Finance Committee, chaired by Rep. Barney Frank, Democrat from Massachusetts, in the Congress and Sen. Chris Dodd, Democrat from Connecticut, in the Senate in early 2009, with the hopes of working with Republicans in a bipartisan effort. Six months earlier, the stock markets had melted down due to the Sub Prime loan problem and Banks had been repackaging them and selling them as Derivatives. The Bush Administration had pushed through TARP at that time as they were worried the banking system might collapse. It was very scary times. This was the background when Barack Obama was elected. What was not known was that Senate Republicans were going to decide not to work with our new President when it came tome to vote for change.

The Republicans kept negotiating with Democrats in hopes of moving them off their "extreme Socialist agenda" and negotiated throughout 2009 on these Committees until Democrats moved off their positions and the Bill was diluted. They continued this approach well into 2010 until, on the Senate side, Sen. Dodd finally gave up and decided to write the Bill himself. He wrote a Bill but did not go back to earlier positions he had. He incorporated the Republican negotiated points into his Bill, less a few minor deletions, but in essence the same Bill. The Republicans as a block have not voted for this Bill and even if it gets passed, because the Bill was diluted, it still will not solve many of the original problems because the Republicans have endorsed all of the Bank Lobby positions. Banks don't really want regulation, so now you understand the problem.

So here we are trying to pass Financial reform as the stock market keeps dropping and the problems have not been totally solved in this legislation and will not as long as the Democrats attempt some bipartisanship. The Republicans can claim the Bill does nothing to resolve some of the issues (They are correct in this but it is because they worked to dilute the legislation). It actually does restrict the flow of capital, as it was intended. It all sounds bad from people who don't understand the issue or the background. In any event this Congress and this President will be blamed for the outcome. The Democrats have been hoodwinked and the Senate hasn't had the courage to change the filibuster Rule and get passed these regulations. I am so tired of Democrats being wimps. You know if their roles were reversed the Republicans would eliminate the Rule in a heart beat! It's a damn shame.

Senate and Congress on Financial reforms: They sold out!

First the headlines and the subscript: New financial rules might not prevent next crisis! The most sweeping changes to financial rules since the Great Depression might not prevent another crisis.

The article was written by AP Business Writers Daniel Wagner and Stevenson Jacobs and posted on Yahoo.com. It lays out in very concise language the problem, the solution and why the solution might not work. For example, remember the Financial reform Bill passed by the Senate and the Congress was supposed to solve Too-big-to-fail institutions. Here's the excerpt on that particular topic:

The problem:
After bad bets on housing and other risky investments caused the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the government pumped billions into the largest banks to keep the system afloat.

The solution: The overhaul would let regulators close banks whose collapse could threaten the system.

Why it might not work:

The Senate bill lets regulators decide whether to protect the creditors of failed banks. Creditors might take a too-rosy view of a banks' finances if they feel they have nothing to lose in a failure. They might still lend to weak banks and raise the cost of eventually closing them down.
The bill does little to prevent big banks from getting bigger, meaning taxpayers might have to intervene again. A Democratic amendment to limit the size of banks was rejected amid opposition from banks such as Goldman Sachs.

The Bill passed by the Senate last week must be reconciled with the House version of th Bill. Interested persons should call their Congressmen and tell them to fix these gaps and close those loopholes!

To read the full article (and it is worth reading), click here.