Feingold says won't vote to advance Wall St bill

[notesdev]

Source: Reuters

June 28 (Reuters) - Senator Russell Feingold said on Monday that he will not vote to advance the financial-reform bill, denying his fellow Democrats the 60th vote they need to clear a final hurdle in Congress.

"My test for the financial regulatory reform bill is whether it will prevent another crisis," Feingold said in a prepared statement. The bill "fails that test and for that reason I will not vote to advance it."

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSWEN640420100628

[depakid]

1. Pretty well stating the obvious

Get it done at least mostly right- or not at all.

[midnight]

2. It would seem like a no brainer. K&R

[Skittles]

12. it's HCR part two

:thumbsdown:

[Francisco]

3. This bill is a joke..

kill the bill and make it obvious that this bill is a facade to the point that the media has to report on it.

[saigon68]

34. Its a dead duck

[harun]

64. +1

[bvar22]

4. At least there is one Democratic Senator...

...who hasn't sold out to Wall Street.

[pundaint]

5. Now That's a Democrat! Thanks Russ you're working on the People's side.

[earcandle]

6. A man with heart! Wow! Brains! oHMy!

[No Elephants]

35. You forgot courage.

[Scarsdale Vibe]

7. Feingold is the most loved man on Wall Street now.

He'll save Wall Street tens of billions of dollars in bonuses just this year alone. Maybe the heartfelt missives from Wall Street execs thanking him for not having to cut back their employees' Christmas bonuses this year will change his mind.

[depakid]

10. Show me where the bill deals with bonuses...

[Scarsdale Vibe]

23. Cutting profit margins by 10-20% will certainly affect bonuses.

Some banks are going to be hard-pressed to meet the more stringent capital requirements and those with lucrative derivative desks and highly leveraged prop trading divisions will be hit hard too.

[No Elephants]

37. Future bailouts versus MAYBE somewhat lower bonuses this year for SOME banks?

No, I don't see too many banks thanking Feingold for that. Especially since his goal is a real reform bill, instead of this lame one.

[sabrina 1]

15. Really, try something else. As long as derivatives remain

untouched, as Feingold says, and it's sad he's the only one to say so, it can all happen again. Wall St.

We need REAL regulation, not this watered down excuse for a reform bill. Nothing at all would be better, because if this passes, it could take another crash before we have an opportunity like this again.

[Scarsdale Vibe]

24. Derivatives remain untouched? Read the provisions.

If Feingold is saying they remain untouched, there's a reason he's the only one saying so, because it's a lie.

[notesdev]

27. That's quite a charge

Do you really think that the banks would allow this "reform" bill to come into play if they hadn't already worked out all the loopholes, exemptions, regulatory captures, and other ways to weasel out of any apparently effective provision? If so, you haven't been watching them for very long.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

31. If going by your mindset, why pass any bills at all?

after all, no bills will have any effect since everybody will already have worked out how to use all the loopholes, exemptions, regulatory captures, and other ways to weasel out of any apparently effective provisions?

sounds like a rather defeatist attitude methinks.

[No Elephants]

39. I don't recall a history of Feingold's lying to the public.

[sabrina 1]

56. I have read the provisions.

Real reform was prevented on behalf of Wall St. As many analysts have said, 'Wall St. won the day'.

Financial Reform Bill Passes; Banks Keep Derivative Units, Volcher Rules Softened

Another missed opportunity and still no consequences for the corrupt Wall St. Bankers who brought this country's economy to its knees. They will, probably already have, use the gaping loopholes in this 'reform' bill to continue doing business as usual, until the next major collapse. Since these collapses do not affect them, they have nothing to worry about. What we should do about it all is the question, because what we have been doing obviously isn't working.


Btw, I have never known Feingold to lie. And I was speaking for myself, not Feingold which I think was pretty obvious. A BIT hyperbolically perhaps, as they did technically touch derivatives, but just barely.

[earcandle]

57. Agreed!

I will NOT finish my Accounting curriculum until derivatives
stop being taught as legal viable ways to conduct business
with the people's tax dollars, fees, penalties and interest! 
I will NOT become a CPA to do this kind of dirty work for $250
per hour.  I will not ever extend myself to carry the burden
of deceit for any business and be paid a bonus for doing so. 
I will not allow my psyche to grow weary with unearned cash
piling up my coffers nor let high profile guilt bond me with
other criminals who have done the same. I am one of the lucky
ones who will NOT commit suicide before I am led to jail as a
scapegoat for others who led me there, because I have
refrained from the single focus of getting wealthy through
greed and crime.  

I am quite content. And relying on Social Security to keep its
promise as I have paid in since 1966. 

If you are young, and going for an MBA, try to refrain.  

[midnight]

50. I think you mean Wall street will be thanking Scott Brown

for his big loop hole allowing Wall Street to do what they do best.

[JackRiddler]

65. au contraire...

If this bill full of half and quarter measures goes down, when the crash resumes the Democrats get to blame the Republicans, instead of correctly being blamed themselves for having made such a tepid response. Feingold is doing his party a favor.

You'd think restoring the Glass-Steagal regulations that were in place for 70 years and would have prevented the worst bankster moves of the last 11 years would have been relatively simple. This bill doesn't even try that.

[dflprincess]

8. I wonder how long before Russ gets a ride on Air Force One?

Holding out for real reform never seems to go over well with the White House and they may feel the need to speak to him privately.

[earcandle]

9. That sounds like Nazi strong arming. Are you suggesting such a thing? From OBAMA?

[Skittles]

13. I answer for her: YES

[dflprincess]

14. Okay Skittles,

this one time you may put a word in my mouth. :hi:

[No Elephants]

40. Nazis had Air Force One?

[TheWatcher]

59. Ask Kucinich.

He's seen it first hand on HCR.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pattmarty]

45. To a stupid idiotic childish made up word like that, FUCK YEAH.............

..........that would be the ONLY response.

[LostinVA]

33. "Leftbagger"?

Oh brother.

[pattmarty]

36. Why the fuck don't you try something original? Childish, stupid rhetoric.

[Paulie]

16. But but, he's grandstanding like Kucinich

How dare he not toe the line like he's suposed to. Traitor to the party, what's right for the country and not the party; Purge him! Sic the pumas on his cheese behind.

[HankyDubs]

17. Hey, let's do nothing...

...and wait until the GOPbaggers are in charge again! I'm sure they'll do a SUPER job regulating Wall street!

We can say we stood on principle when the next catastrophe occurs! That'll be such a solace!

[notesdev]

18. There are alternatives

For example, we can put the proven solution - Glass-Steagal - back in force. Passing another 2000-plus-page monstrosity that won't fix the problem is just going to hasten the day when the GOP is back in charge. Bills like that demonstrate both the corruption of the legislative process as well as the lack of seriousness of purpose that this country desperately needs right now.

[HankyDubs]

19. For example, we can put the proven solution - Glass-Steagal - back in force.

No, no we can't. Otherwise we'd be doing that. Got news for ya...the GOP will pick up senate seats in the fall and we will have written their campaign commercials for them.

[notesdev]

20. Why can't we?

"Otherwise we'd be doing that."

I'm sorry, I don't at all see this as a given, with the way the banks openly bribe our representatives.

For anyone who understands how this latest crisis came to pass, putting Glass-Steagal back in force is a no-brainer - it should have been done the day that Lehman went down.

[HankyDubs]

21. Its a given BECAUSE the banks are openly bribing everyone.

Of course Glass-Steagall is a no brainer...if we could actually put together the votes to put it back in place. We don't have them now and we won't have it when the new senate convenes either.

The only way we can reform the system is by slowly changing the narrative--and we do that by passing legislation, not by bickering amongst ourselves. Of course this is all just theater, but in the long run it actually is important for democrats to have achievements to show voters on election day. For all their stupidity, the right understands this. Why don't we?

[notesdev]

22. This bill would have been no achievement

It would have been an failure, and people will know that nothing had really changed... meanwhile all the hidden clauses in the bill would be a running sore, I bet in 2200 pages the opposition could easily have enough material to dribble out a new embarrassment every day from now until the election, and then some.

The way to change the narrative is to get serious - and that's to pass Glass-Steagal. If this Congress can't do that, it is our duty to replace them, whether they be Democrats or Republicans - and to continue to replace them until we get representatives who will represent the people and not the banking cartel.

[HankyDubs]

25. people will know that nothing had really changed

You give the people far too much credit. The electorate are a pack of ignorant fools; they are fickle and so easily misled. We won't be replacing the Senators, the electorate will. They must see a clear difference between a left wing that can unify enough to take steps (even baby steps) in the direction that the majority of the country wants to go--and a right wing that serves as a mouthpiece for the wealthy.

If we do nothing on all these fronts, we won't just lose the majorities--in two years we'll be looking at President Jeb Bush who will then appoint more disgraceful traitors to the SCOTUS. We must have the stomach for the long fight ahead of us. The right began theirs in the 40's.

Please don't quote the number of pages to me again. If the bill was one page long, the GOPbaggers would find lies to tell about it. The point is to have a narrative with which to counter them.

[Wayne in WA State]

28. Reality

HankyDubs is correct. We can take what's possible to accomplish now and keep our long term goals in our sights, or we can make noise about standing up for some higher principle and watch the right wing cheer another round of Democratic fratricide. We cannot afford to be pious in the battle against conservatives. Job number one is Democratic unity. Without it nothing gets done.

[HankyDubs]

32. And that doesnt mean for one danged second...

...that people like notesdev or Feingold need to shut up and get with the program. I'd never ever call them "leftbaggers" that's effing repulsive. I hope yawl can hear my point of view and not associate it with stupidity like that. I respect notesdev's passion and I actually agree completely with him/her that this bill is totally insufficient.

[rpannier]

48. Can you identify the hold outs on reimplimenting Glass-Steagall

Because John McCain said he was in favor of reimplementing Glass-Steagel last December (December 14, 2009)

That would be 59+1 (He could probably prod Graham, Brown, Snowe and Collins to join in)

[HankyDubs]

58. you take McCain at his word?

John McCain would favor reimplementing Glass-Steagall until it came to a vote. Then he'd flip flop just on principle.

[rpannier]

63. So your answer is No nt

[midnight]

51. True.

[No Elephants]

42. Of course we could restore Glass Steagall, if we chose.

I'm not sure that is the best solution, but our old antitrust laws and Depression Era reforms kept us out of collapse for a very long time. And repealing or loosening them opened ways for the greedy to get us into trouble even trillions haven't totally fixed yet.

[No Elephants]

41. Or, we could keep pretending that "better than nothing bills" are real reform.

Seems to me, we'll never get real reform if we keep not only accepting less, but cheering it.

Also seems to me, the less real choice voters are given, the more likely they are simply to vote out incumbents whenever they are unhappy, no matter which Party is seen as "incumbent" at any given election.

[Catherina]

26. Thank you Russ. Stand fast! We got your back! n/t

[impik]

30. Shame on any Democrat who will filibuster with the Republicans and shame on people here

for supporting it.

[h9socialist]

54. Hear! Hear!

[sendero]

38. This is a tough one..

... the bill, a lot like HCR only perhaps a bit better, falls FAR FAR short of what it should be.

But, it IS a lot better than nothing. And unfortunately those are going to be our choices, this or nothing.

In this case I'd have to go with the bill. It does offer some pretty open-ended regulatory interpretation, and while it is not exactly what we need, we're not going to get exactly what we need in the foreseeable future.

[No Elephants]

43. All important stuff is tough.

[sendero]

46. Well...

... take a stand then.

[mvd]

61. Maybe like Kucinich he's holding out for a while

That's a good thing because it shows we can do better. My guess is he'll support it in the end.

[dflprincess]

62. Just another bill that "can be fixed later"

That list is getting awfully long and nothing ever gets fixed.

If this bill passes Congress & the president will pretend that financial regulation has been dealt with and never revisit the subject. Just like they're pretending the insurance bill fixed health care.

[SkyDaddy7]

44. Wall Street & the GOP CELEBRATE!

Now the GOP does not have to worry about being accused of protecting Wall Street...That blame will be on the Democrats as we head into November.

I understand where he is coming from but if he thinks he can get a better bill with a Republican controlled congress then I must be missing something. This is it...Just like health care you can only pass what you have the votes for.

Oh well, the Democrats sure do know how to defeat themselves time and time again!

[girl gone mad]

47. That makes no sense.

You believe Republicans are going to say this was a great bill that could have passed if only Russ Feingold hadn't stopped it? Even though most of them would be voting against it?

Walk me through this one, because the logic doesn't work from where I stand.

[SkyDaddy7]

68. Since when do the Republicans need "LOGIC"...

to win a political battle in the eyes of the American people?

[rpannier]

49. They probably have the votes for reimplementing Glass-Steagel

They did last December because they had John Mc Cain on board
But, they didn't bother to try

[midnight]

52. This bill without the regulations of the Glass-Stiegel Act

will have Wall Street celebrating more than when they created the greatest wealth transfer in history-Banks to big to fail bailouts. But since Scott Brown was the leverage in this deal, maybe we can give some of the blame to the Republicans.

[SkyDaddy7]

69. I hope so but...

Over the past year the Republicans have been able to change the minds of the American People with pure BS and lies! I do not think a "majority" of the American People have the ability to look at the issues at hand and THINK!

They watch bits of the media or FOX "News" so they have no clue what is actually going on!

As for Glass-Stiegel...The Republicans would have played that as they do almost anything Obama and/or the Democratic Party is for, "A BIG GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER"! Even though most if not all here on DU understand the economy worked fine under the Glass-Stiegel Act for decades most of the American Public has no clue what the Glass-Stiegel Act is! This is the problem with trying to fix this country! Everything that needs to be fixed is complicated and that allows the GOP to fool enough of the public to prevent change! SAD!

[Jefferson23]

53. Feingold is brave, bold and truthful, he speaks for me. "Dead On Arrival: Financial Reform Fails"

By Simon Johnson

The House-Senate reconciliation process is still underway and some details will still change. But the broad contours of “financial reform” are already completely clear; there are no last minute miracles at this level of politics. The new consumer protection agency for financial products is a good idea and worth supporting – assuming someone sensible is appointed by the president to run it. Yet, at the end of the day, essentially nothing in the entire legislation will reduce the potential for massive system risk as we head into the next credit cycle.

Go, for example, through the summary of “comprehensive financial regulatory reform bills” in President Obama’s letter to the G20 last week.
The president argues for more capital in banking – and this is a fine goal, particularly as the Europeans continue to drag their feet on this issue. But how much capital does his Treasury team think is “enough”? Most indications are that they will seek tier one capital requirements in the range of 10-12 percent – which is what Lehman had right before it failed. How would that help?

“Stronger oversight of derivatives” is also on the president’s international agenda but this cannot be taken seriously, given how little Treasury and the White House have pushed for tighter control of derivatives in the US legislation. If Senator Lincoln has made any progress at all – and we shall see where her initiative ends up – it has been without the full cooperation of the administration. (The WSJ today has a more positive interpretation, but even in this narrative you have to ask – where was the administration on this issue in the nine months of intense debate and hard work prior to April? Have they really woken up so recently to the dangers here?)

http://baselinescenario.com/2010/06/21/dead-on-arrival-financial-reform-fails/

[Jefferson23]

55. Wall Street 'Reform' in a Nutshell: The Politicians Lied, Media Applauded, and We Americans Will Suf

By Dylan Ratigan, AlterNet
Posted on June 26, 2010, Printed on June 29, 2010
http://www.alternet.org/story/147339/

The same Washington spinsters who have driven our country into the ground seemed to be out in full force on Friday, claiming that their latest policy "victory" is the most "sweeping change" of our financial regulatory since the Great Depression.

Actually, it is nothing more than window dressing.

The real sweeping change of our financial system took place over the past 20 years. The irresponsible repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999. The Commodities and Futures Modernization Act of 2000 by Larry Summers and Bob Rubin -- the one that legalized the most destructive financial instruments of all, derivatives. The leverage exemption at the SEC in 2004, asked for (in person) and received by Hank Paulson and friends.

Of course, there are small victories here -- there is better investor protection and, most importantly, an awakened citizenry.

What's not fixed?

http://www.alternet.org/economy/147339/wall_street_%27reform%27_in_a_nutshell%3A_the_politicians_lied%2C_media_applauded%2C_and_we_americans_will_suffer/

[Jefferson23]

60. kick n/t

[totodeinhere]

66. Feingold for president. n/t

[ProudDad]

67. Funny Money in the Ponzi scheme debt based "economy"...who cares?

Think outside the capitalist box...

http://steadystate.org /
www.transitionus.org
http://www.postcarbon.org /
http://www.relocalization.net /
http://www.radicalrelocalization.com /