Thursday, July 22, 2010

Thanks, Senator Reid...

Sometimes, it takes some silly political ad to get one thinking. And you know what? To paraphrase Vice President Joe Biden, this newly passed financial regulatory reform really is a big f*cking deal. And why the hell would we want to get rid of it before we even see it put to work?

Do we really want to repeal the Wall Street reform law before the ink is dry? Do we want depository institutions like commercial banks and bank holding corporations to gamble with proprietary funds so that when they create another bursting bubble we'll have to bail them out again? Don't we want something like Title III section 214 that says no taxpayer funds can be used for bank liquidation? We don't want an audit of the Fed for the period between 2007 and 2008 pertaining to its actions during the financial crisis? I thought these items were considered important features of regulatory reform.

Would we like to repeal the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, and go back to the "old ways" in which mortgage agents could generate "no-doc" (liar's loans) and other highly questionable financial products? Do we want to go back to the bad-old-days when over the counter derivatives were unregulated and not required to be sent through some form of clearing house? [FT] Do we like being gouged by exploding interest rates and fees?

Some of the bill's critics are correct in saying that it won't absolutely, positively, guaranteed 100%, prevent the next Wall Street manufactured credit calamity. However, it's a whole lot better than the current system which just about guarantees absolutely positively 100% that Wall Street -- left to its own devices -- will create another whopper of a mess. At the very least they'll be playing with their own money, and the taxpayers won't have to clean up after them.

The Republican offering was to create a voluntary financial industry panel of some sort to "oversee" banking and credit operations... We had a good look at how well the financial industry policed itself from 1999-2007, and it wasn't pretty. Reid spokesman Jim Manley summed things up: "The ink hasn’t even dried yet on our bill that takes away big banks’ ability to gamble away our jobs, savings and houses, and Republicans already want to give it back. This is the Republican job-killing agenda in full effect: they want to go back to the system that cost 8 million Americans their jobs because that’s what their friends on Wall Street want, and that’s who they’re looking out for.” [DemSen] Once more, the essential question is simple: Which side are you on? Working Americans? Or, Wall Street financial corporations?

Since of course, Sharron Angle would have rejected any effort to rein in Wall Street greed run amok... Even if we (again) had to bail them out on our taxpayer dime.

So thank you, Harry Reid, for delivering financial regulatory reform that starts to right that badly wronged Wall Street ship... And for health care reform, and for unemployment aid, and for all the Recovery Act aid that meant local jobs in my community AND much improved roads, and for fighting against ridiculous boondoggles like the Yucca Mountain dump and Sloan Hills gravel pit... And, well, the list goes on.

It's really nice to have one Senator who puts Nevada's best interest over the big Wall Street corporate interests.

And by the way, if you don't think Reid has been all that perfect (he's not) or progressive, think of what Sharrontology Obtuse Angle would do. She's in the pocket of the Wall Street corporate interests and California Republican operatives pulling all the strings at Tea Party, Inc.

Again, why would we want that?


  1. I am optimistic but cautious. I have heard this bill may squeeze profit margins on things like overdraft fees to the point that free chequing accounts may be a thing of the past.

    That alarms me as a person of no real substantial means, since I can not afford the minimum balance banks want and have too little money to afford the fees for keeping a low balance.

    I would send Senator Reid flowers, though, if he got rid of the opt-out prescreened offers that the credit industry spams with in hand with the reporting agencies. That has never been fair, in my opinion.

    I'd even look beyond his calling me a loser and vote for him if he did. :-/

  2. "I'd even look beyond his calling me a loser"

    Jeez... Sharrontology called you "spoiled", "lazy", and downright sinful. And remember, she OPPOSED extending unemployment benefits. Unlike Reid, her "Reid moments" are more like her true batshit crazy.

    "I have heard this bill may squeeze profit margins on things like overdraft fees to the point that free chequing accounts may be a thing of the past."

    That's nothing more than bank industry scare tactics. They threw stuff like that out to the media for the sake of scaring you and other consumers against FinReg... And in turn, scaring away Senate votes. I'm glad it backfired. And remember, if some banks go forward with fee hikes, we the consumers can always take our business elsewhere. (I, for one, can hardly wait to dump BofA!)