Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Bi-Partisan Origins of the Financial Crisis: Shattering the Glass-Steagall Act

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 11:54 AM
Original message
The Bi-Partisan Origins of the Financial Crisis: Shattering the Glass-Steagall Act
September 19, 2008
The Bi-Partisan Origins of the Financial Crisis
Shattering the Glass-Steagall Act
By WILLIAM KAUFMAN

If you're looking for a major cause of the current banking meltdown, you need seek no farther than the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

The Glass-Steagall Act, passed in 1933, mandated the separation of commercial and investment banking in order to protect depositors from the hazards of risky investment and speculation. It worked fine for fifty years until the banking industry began lobbying for its repeal during the 1980s, the go-go years of Reaganesque market fundamentalism, an outlook embraced wholeheartedly by mainstream Democrats under the rubric "neoliberalism."

The main cheerleader for the repeal was Phil Gramm, the fulsome reactionary who, until he recently shoved his foot even farther into his mouth than usual, was McCain's chief economic advisor.

This disgraceful bow to the banking industry, eagerly signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1999, bears a major share of responsibility for the current banking crisis. Here's the complete roll call of shame:

REPUBLICANS FOR (52): Abraham, Allard, Ashcroft, Bennett, Brownback, Bond, Bunning, Burns, Campbell, Chafee, Cochran, Collins, Coverdell, Craig, Crapo, DeWine, Domenici, Enzi, Frist, Gorton, Gramm (Tex.), Grams (Minn.), Grassley, Gregg, Hegel, Hatch, Helms, Hutchinson (Ark.), Hutchison (Tex.), Inhofe, Jeffords, Kyl, Lott, Lugar, Mack, McConnell, Murkowski, Nickles, Roberts, Roth, Santorum, Sessions, Smith (N.H.), Smith (Ore.), Snowe, Specter, Stevens, Thomas, Thompson, Thurmond, Voinovich and Warner. DEMOCRATS FOR (38): Akaka, Baucus, Bayh, Biden, Bingaman, Breaux, Byrd, Cleland, Conrad, Daschle, Dodd, Durbin, Edwards, Feinstein, Graham (Fla.), Hollings, Inouye, Johnson, Kennedy, Kerrey (Neb.), Kerry (Mass.), Kohl, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Lincoln, Moynihan, Murray, Reed (R.L), Reid (Nev.), Robb, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Schumer, Torricelli and Wyden.

REPUBLICANS AGAINST(1): Shelby.

DEMOCRATS AGAINST(7): Boxer, Bryan, Dorgan, Feingold, Harkin, Mikulski and Wellstone.

NOT VOTING: 2 REPUBLICANS (2): Fitzgerald (voted present) and McCain.

The House Democrats were no less enthusiastic in their endorsement of this invitation to plunder--the repeal passed there by a margin of 343-86, with the Donkey Party favoring the measure by a two-to-one margin, 138-69. Current House speaker Nancy Pelosi managed not to register a vote on this one, so great was her fear of offending her party's corporate paymasters even though she knew passage was a sure thing.

http://www.counterpunch.org/kaufman09192008.html

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

Repeal of the Act

See also Depository_Institutions_Deregulation_and_Monetary_Control_Act passed in 1980, the Garn-St._Germain_Depository_Institutions_Act deregulating the Savings and Loan industry in 1982, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA) in 1999. The bills were passed by a 54-44 vote along party lines with Republican support in the Senate<8> and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives<9>. Nov 4, 1999: After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. This veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999. <10>

The banking industry had been seeking the repeal of Glass-Steagall since at least the 1980s. In 1987 the Congressional Research Service prepared a report which explored the case for preserving Glass-Steagall and the case against preserving the act.<11>

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. Citigroup played a major part in the repeal. Then called Citicorp, the company merged with Travelers Insurance company the year before using loopholes in Glass-Steagall that allowed for temporary exemptions. With lobbying led by Roger Levy, the "finance, insurance and real estate industries together are regularly the largest campaign contributors and biggest spenders on lobbying of all business sectors . They laid out more than $200 million for lobbying in 1998, according to the Center for Responsive Politics..." These industries succeeded in their two decades long effort to repeal the act.<12>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00354
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. Article implies only 62 members of the Senate
I've seen different numbers on the actual Senate vote that demonstrate in went down strict party lines with the exception of only 1 democrat voting in favor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. 38 Democrats voted for it (85% of them).
Including Biden, btw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Your Drinking the "Rush LimpDick KoolAid Lady"
Here is the ACTUAL US GOVERNMENT Recorded Votes

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act.

53 Republican Senators plus one Democrat - AYE

44 Democrats no Republicans - NAY

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act, Pub. L. No. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (November 12, 1999), is an Act of the United States Congress which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, opening up competition among banks, securities companies and insurance companies. The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited a bank from offering investment, commercial banking, and insurance services.

Economist Robert Kuttner has criticized the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act as contributing to the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...1&vote =00105

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I must be....
Took a glance at the OP and saw:

REPUBLICANS FOR (52): Abraham, Allard, Ashcroft, Bennett, Brownback, Bond, Bunning, Burns, Campbell, Chafee, Cochran, Collins, Coverdell, Craig, Crapo, DeWine, Domenici, Enzi, Frist, Gorton, Gramm (Tex.), Grams (Minn.), Grassley, Gregg, Hegel, Hatch, Helms, Hutchinson (Ark.), Hutchison (Tex.), Inhofe, Jeffords, Kyl, Lott, Lugar, Mack, McConnell, Murkowski, Nickles, Roberts, Roth, Santorum, Sessions, Smith (N.H.), Smith (Ore.), Snowe, Specter, Stevens, Thomas, Thompson, Thurmond, Voinovich and Warner. DEMOCRATS FOR (38): Akaka, Baucus, Bayh, Biden, Bingaman, Breaux, Byrd, Cleland, Conrad, Daschle, Dodd, Durbin, Edwards, Feinstein, Graham (Fla.), Hollings, Inouye, Johnson, Kennedy, Kerrey (Neb.), Kerry (Mass.), Kohl, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Lincoln, Moynihan, Murray, Reed (R.L), Reid (Nev.), Robb, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Schumer, Torricelli and Wyden.

REPUBLICANS AGAINST(1): Shelby.

DEMOCRATS AGAINST(7): Boxer, Bryan, Dorgan, Feingold, Harkin, Mikulski and Wellstone.

NOT VOTING: 2 REPUBLICANS (2): Fitzgerald (voted present) and McCain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. That Is Wrong: "The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 "

"The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA) in 1999. The bills were passed by a 54-44 vote along party lines with Republican support in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives. Nov 4, 1999: After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions.

The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. This veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

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


U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 106th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Conference Report (S.900 Conference Report )
Vote Number: 354 Vote Date: November 4, 1999, 03:30 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Conference Report Agreed to
Measure Number: S. 900
Measure Title: An Act to enhance competition in the financial services industry by providing a prudential framework for the affiliation of banks, securities firms, and other financial service providers, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 90
NAYs 8
Present 1
Not Voting 1

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---90
Abraham (R-MI)
Akaka (D-HI)
Allard (R-CO)
Ashcroft (R-MO)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Breaux (D-LA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Campbell (R-CO)
Chafee, L. (R-RI)
Cleland (D-GA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coverdell (R-GA)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daschle (D-SD)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Edwards (D-NC)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Gorton (R-WA)
Graham (D-FL)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grams (R-MN)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Helms (R-NC)
Hollings (D-SC)
Hutchinson (R-AR)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (R-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerrey (D-NE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Mack (R-FL)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moynihan (D-NY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nickles (R-OK)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Robb (D-VA)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Roth (R-DE)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Smith (R-NH)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Torricelli (D-NJ)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---8
Boxer (D-CA)
Bryan (D-NV)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Shelby (R-AL)
Wellstone (D-MN)

Present - 1
Fitzgerald (R-IL)

Not Voting - 1
McCain (R-AZ)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00354
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Conference Report Agreed to - is not passage of the Bill
Check your link

The vote you cited is for "Conference Report Agreed to"

NOT passage of the Bill

This is purely Rush LimpDick tactics of distorting the truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Effective tactics none the less...
It threw me for a loop, but with all the rolling over the Dems have done the last few years, it didn't seem out of the ordinary. Thanks for the clarification.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThatPoetGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Nope.
Kaufman (cited in the OP) has been bamboozled. Flimflammed.

Here's is Phil Gramm's resolution that overturned Glass-Steagall: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00105

Biden didn't vote for it. Only one Democratic Senator voted for it, Hollings.

This was NOT a bipartisan screwup.

The vote cited in the OP was a minor addition, later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. That was the Senate version
When the Senate version passed it had to be adjusted to agree with the House version. It was the final version that is what is being referred to in this post. Yes it was indeed a Bi-Partisan dismantling of the banking regulations from Depression era.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. YOU as WRONG as a FREEPER
The link offered in support of that arguement is "Conference Report Agreed to"

NOT Passage of the Bill

Just a minor detail yea
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Don't You Understand What A Conference Report Is? Let Us Help You!
Edited on Fri Sep-19-08 12:57 PM by Better Believe It
Without the passage of the Conference Report the bill could not have become law.

What the hell do you think they were voting on .... the price of food in the Senate cafeteria?

Now read this sentence very carefully, one word at a time if necessary.

"The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. This veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

Now are you still confused about the meaning of this sentence and what a Conference Report is?

It's a bill! It becomes the law after the President signs it!

Still don't understand?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I learn something new here every day
"A conference report is an agreement on legislation that is negotiated between the House and Senate via conference committees. It is printed and submitted to each chamber for its consideration, such as approval or disapproval."

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/confrpts/index.html

What would have happened if the Dems hadn't agreed to the negotiated legislation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. If this was really "veto proof legislation" did Clinton have a choice about signing it?
Plus, WTF was everyone thinking who voted for it?

Damn.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. 30+ Democratic Senators flipped their votes afte Clinton made it clear that he wanted this bill
and would sign it. The vote on the original bill was straight along party lines with the Dems against it.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. NO - let me help you understand - IT IS NOT A BILL
It does NOT become Law

It IS a MERE FORMALITY they vote on acceptance - to the Official Record

So they can vote Ya or Nea on the actual Bill
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. YOU as WRONG as a FREEPER
The link offered in support of that arguement is "Conference Report Agreed to"

NOT Passage of the Bill

Just a minor detail yea
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThatPoetGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. Just not true.
Not bipartisan. 53 Republican Senators and one Dem.

That was the bill that did it.

Then the two legislative houses are required to work out the differences between the bills that passed in the two separate houses. The bill some dems voted for was to say, yes, the senate's bill and the congress's bill have had their differences worked out.

Only one Democratic Senator voted to remove the regulations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
2. Looking at the votes, pretty much an equal opportunity fuck up....
Lets not fool ourselves again. The opposition party doesn't oppose these free market policies (or Neocon policies, or fascist policies).

Its just damn sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThatPoetGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. Argh.
A bill went before Senate, and a bill went before the House of Reps. In both houses, Republicans overwhelmingly supported the crap, and Democrats overwhelmingly rejected it.

But there were minor differences between the Senate's bill and the Reps' bill. So some accountant looked them over and worked out the differences. Then it was put to a vote, have the differences between these two versions been worked out? and Dems voted, yes, the differences have been worked out.

That's all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. That's Not The Way It Works

"So some accountant looked them over and worked out the differences."

Not really.

A joint committee of Senate and House members and their staff (Democrats & Republicans) meet and work out a compromise bill.

A final bill and it's final language "the Conference Report" is than voted on by the Senate.

When passed by Congress and signed by the President it becomes law.

I think that's way it actually works.

If someone has other information, with links, please post it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toucano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
7. This isn't the whole story
This is the vote for the conference committee bill that ironed out the differences between the House and Senate versions.

The rollcall vote for passage of the original bill was completely partisan, with only one Democrat voting aye.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00105


I don't understand why the Dems rolled so completely for the conference committee bill, but truth is there was substantial Democratic resistance.

more here:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s106-900

At the end of the day, the result is the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-19-08 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. You got it right
Please send some thing to Wiki to inform them they are lossing credibility with the 100% Distortion of the Truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC