Dodd To Present New Financial Regulations Proposal On Monday
As always, I await Elizabeth Warren's critique. But it doesn't take an expert to see that forbidding states from writing their own, tougher regulations probably isn't good:
WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Senate Banking Committee will unveil on Monday a proposal to revamp the nation’s financial regulations that would empower shareholders to have advisory votes on executive pay and to nominate directors for the boards of public companies through company proxy ballots, several people briefed on the draft legislation said Saturday night.
The shareholder provisions, which have been vigorously opposed by many corporations and by Republicans, will be part of a bill that would amount to the most sweeping overhaul of financial regulations since the Depression. But with no Republican support yet for the proposal, Democratic lawmakers and the White House have been gearing up for a potentially bitter partisan fight.
The impending proposal by the chairman, Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, hews in many ways to a proposal advanced last summer by the White House, the people briefed on the legislation said.
[...] The bill would create a consumer financial protection agency under the umbrella of the Federal Reserve, but with a director appointed by the president and the ability to write rules governing mortgages, credit cards, payday loans and a wide range of other financial products.
It would have some ability, within certain parameters, to ensure that the rules are followed; how the rules would be enforced has been a major source of partisan division. As in a House version of regulatory overhaul adopted in December, the bill would, in some circumstances, restrict states from writing their own, stronger consumer protection rules.
The Federal Reserve would see its bank supervision powers significantly diminished. It would continue to oversee bank holding companies with $50 billion or more in assets, and would be entrusted to regulate systemically important nonbank financial institutions. Mr. Dodd had considered setting the threshold at $100 billion, which would have been even worse for the Fed.
OK, if the president gets to appoint the director, what happens when Bush III gets appointed to the presidency and he appoints one of his buddies?
"But it doesn't take an expert to see that forbidding states from writing their own, tougher regulations probably isn't good"
I would love to see the constitutional precedent they cite which allows them to forbid the states to act on their own behalf within their own territories.
“say on pay,” as the provision is called, would be advisory and not binding,
advisory votes on executive pay,
some ability, within certain parameters, to ensure that the rules are followed,
and to nominate directors,
appeared to be taking steps....
I don't think anyone has ever said anything about say on pay for the working class or the Social Security recipieant. Thinking back to the 1960s the prices of everything from groceries to gasoline has risen to over 1600% where there has been very little increase in income for those that need it.
the more they stay the same.
i remember gas wars when you could buy regular for 6 or 7 cents a gallon, normally 12 to 15, but then i was making 85 cents an hour.
$1.35 at mcdonalds was a good job for a teenager, you had it made...
your point is well taken, $4.50 for a twelve pack of string cheese? my kids can eat that up in 15 minutes.
not much has changed for the working class, chris dodd, geithner, blankfein, all should be required to do what barbara ehrenreich did.
http://www.barbaraehrenreich.com/nickelanddim...
either that or shovel house floors for $25 a day..... for about ten years.
I remember .25c a gallon gas('68, first car)and my first job,$1.65 min. wage. Where did you get .15c gas,Texas,in the 50s? Just asking.
....the fools do not realize,a population that can ,..... not paticipate .............in the 'economy'...,can not keep it viable!..........."we are listening,.......and we're not blind.,......this is your life....this is your time."
It happened in Texas too before major oil companies under deregulation drove smaller independant refiners out of business. It was mainly the independents who fought for their lives against the majors that produced the gasoline wars. The majors had the money to lower prices in areas of the country with a large independant share of the market. Independant producers couldn't keep up with those losses over long periods of time. Many states and local municipalities since have written laws which make every service station sell fuel based on a fixed percentage that keeps gas wars under check. Anyone who drastically reduces fuel prices below the area average price can be in trouble with the law.
"MADISON, Wis. - The state of Wisconsin is being sued in federal court over a law designed to ensure fair competition among gas station owners.
The filing comes after a federal magistrate judge ruled in another lawsuit last year that the law is unconstitutional.
Flying J filed a new lawsuit Jan. 29 in light of the previous ruling asking the court to force the state to stop enforcing the minimum markup law. Flying J operates gas stations in Black River Falls and Oak Creek.
The state did not appeal the earlier ruling but still is enforcing the law despite it being found unconstitutional, Flying J argues. Doing that "chills open competition" in the state's fuel pricing market, challenges the authority of federal courts to enforce the law, and undermines the Constitution, according to the lawsuit."
Donaldd
insane to put any consumer protection institution under the auspices of the Fed, when the Fed itself is rotten to the core and serves only its own interests. If these yahoos were serious about looking after the american People, instead of prostituting government to the bank, corporations, insurance companies and Big Pharma, they'd be talking about abolishing the Fed and returning the functions it has usurped (thanks to the efforts of utterly corrupt politicians of Woodrow wilson's era), abandoning the fractional reserve system and nationalizing all banks.
On a related note, I just watched Michael Moore's Capitalism, A Love Story. Doesn't make Dodd look very good. I had to wonder while watching it if the movie influenced Dodd not to run for re-election. Looks like he's up to his ass in corporate and banking entanglements.If Dodd rolls over on this for the Republicans and banking and wallstreet lobbyists on this (none of whom are needed to get this passed), he may as well go on home and stay there, because he will have been part of the problem and not part of the solutions.
so by definition it will be very corporate friendly, with some token consumer-friendly gestures sprinkled on top.
People keep claiming that Obama is weak and ineffectual, on the contrary, he is being very effective at working behind the scenes to cement America on a rightwing path. He stages things to make it appear he is working against implacable forces is why the American people must settle for incremental crumbs at best.
Though we have a Democratic majority in congress and Democratic majorities in both the Finance and Banking committees, Obama arranged it behind the scenes so teams of 1/2 Republicans and 1/2 Dems (some Blue Dogs) would be responsible for writing the financial regulations (Banking) and healthcare bill (Finance), ensuring that no meaningful reform would be enacted on the 2 biggest areas of domestic policy.
Now he has put together a 'bipartisan' Budget Deficit commission, consisting of 1/2 Republicans and 1/2 Dems (some Blue Dogs), to deal with the 'difficult' issues of 'entitlements' and taxes - again bypassing a Democratic majority. Obama does not want real reform on any issue that the corporations have their fingers in (virtually everything); he working actively for a very rightwing agenda: deregulation (with some token regulation for appearances sake), privatization, low taxes, and war...just like the Republicans.
Btw, on the European hour on NPR yesterday the commentator said that Obama's healthcare bill was 'very rightwing' and that no European would find it acceptable.
ever again. Virtual explains it above.
The Finance Committee Chairman wrote off his committee members to settle on 3 Blue Dogs and 3 Republicans to produce their stupid bill.
Obama had nothing to do with it.
Donaldd
If their is anyone in washington in the senate ar the congress that could be trusted to do anything? Maybe Bernie Sanders. Other then him Mr Grayson and Kucinich I can't think of any.
and a small handful of others that are part way there.
Two things need to be done:
1-Total public funding of elections, with no APC or corporate donations allowed, voters, $100 tops
2-former Congress people and high officials may not take any sort of lobbying job for a minimum of a decade after they leave, so-called, public service.
No change without these at a minimum.
Don't know her name,1st district of Maine.Saw her duke it out with a couple of bullies on c-span thurs. or friday.I will be donating to her campaign.
....the fools do not realize,a population that can ,..... not paticipate .............in the 'economy'...,can not keep it viable!..........."we are listening,.......and we're not blind.,......this is your life....this is your time."
Banning the states from passing more restrictive legislation is a path to disaster - I'd expect this from Republicans, why are the Democrats leading with this?
Is this another case of Charlie Brown making concessions to Lucy so that she'll agree to hold the football for him to kick? Why can't we just say to the Republicans: Here's a bill with lots of things liberals will like - you can either negotiate in good faith and promise to support the compromise bill, or we'll go with it as-is. Why are we continually making concessions without getting something in return? When the Republicans break their promises, why don't we put the concessions back in?
Dodd, not bothering with re-election, is positioning himself to lobby for Wall Street. Dodd initially denied having anything to do with paying out millions in bonuses at AIG, then later acknowledged his role. Liberals soured on him, so he doesn't care what Democrats think of him now.
Public memory is short. Dodd's is not. If he screws American consumers well, he will walk into a seven figure salary with eight-figure bonuses immediately upon leaving office.
Watch this guy screw us all.
pentagon generals "retire" to defense contractors.
senators go to wall street firms, think tanks, etc.
from adviser to a certain senator, to wellpoint was it?, back to adviser to the senator, back to wellpoint?
I want the Republicans to try to defend the financial meltdown and try to defend not enacting regulations and reform to all the people, their constituents, who lost 90% of their 401k and their stock portfolio and ALL their equity in their houses. Yes this will be an interesting fight if the Republicans try to defend financial institutions. I say, "Bring it on!"
'D' as in Democrat.
'D' as in Dodd.
Frank Zappa - Make A Jazz Noise Here
a bad name.
at "...under the umbrella of the Federal Reserve."
I wish the Dems would start ramming real reform down our throats.
It will play better in November than empty appeasement to the right
Handcuffs ..
Perp Walks ..
And Prison Time ..
In a REAL Prison ..
AFTER the Current Crowd of Criminals is in Prison
THEN we can discuss Re-Regulation of the Financial Sector ..
Until the Powers That Be start to Enforce the Laws That Exist, ANY "reform" is meaningless ..
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
shaved heads and body lice powder
Probably something cushy, like, with a BANK. So the bill will reflect his job prospects. I liked to think he had integrity, and we'll see if that is true very soon.
again, yes, yes,yes typical fall back mannuever of the Dems all hype NO action.
They must alert their adversaries and then pretend to be dumb founded when they continually pull these stupid announcements. WHY? doesn't he just come out and say he is owned by ther Bankers and has to make these empty promises and news cycles so his BUDDIES can start screaming how unfair it is to stop them from STEALING from people.
Just haven't decided were this guy fits in Cave-In like Pelosi or shout out and FALL BACK like Ried, both worhtless and neither has accomplished any real NATIONAL issues with out first drumming up the opposition so it looks like they made the attempt.
They really do not believe they are in charge and they do have a strong belief in they are LOSERS and they try to support that every chance they get.
So as far as Mr. Dodd goes it is all Smoke and Mirrors with NO real attempt at change, just let my buddies know that I need their HELP to DEFEAT this and make it look like I tried.
The bill would create a consumer financial protection agency under the umbrella of the Federal Reserve, but with a director appointed by the president and the ability to write rules governing mortgages, credit cards, payday loans and a wide range of other financial products.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sounds oddly like the "Board of Governors"
"As an independent federal government agency, the Board of Governors does not receive funding from Congress, and the terms of the seven members of the Board span multiple presidential and congressional terms."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressman Alan Grayson Grills Fed Vice Chair Donald Kohn
Alan Grayson laughs in Ben Bernanke's face - priceless!
Alan... Is Anyone Minding the Store at the
FederalReserve?Alan with The Fed's lawyer:
Plunge Protection Team:
The Fed's Primary Dealers List:
Study the symptoms not the virus...
...states can't write looser rules. I see that as a good thing. I also think there should be a standard that is national, since banks are multi-state entities. It's a very similar issue to the argument against allowing insurers to sell across state lines.
"But with no Republican support yet for the proposal, Democratic lawmakers and the White House have been gearing up for a potentially bitter partisan fight."
I find it extremely interesting that it is "Dodd" instead of "Dodd's Committee" presenting the proposal. This implies to me that this is a one-man project.
Was their any Republican input on the project? If not, then isn't it pretty asinine to expect Republicans to support a law or policy that they had NO input on? Sounds stupid to me.
Removing the power from the states is exactly what they want to do, centralized control even more. Dodd and Shelby are both corporate sponsored as described here and here. In the end, this will produce less regulation on the financial services industry as dictated by the Financial Services Agreement we signed (WTO) in 1999 under Clinton.
Comments are closed on this entry