Obama administration braces for reports of bank profits by weighing new financial tax

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Jan 12, 2010 at 11:23


The Harry Reid scandal probably is not going to hurt overall Democratic electoral and legislative positioning that much, if at all.  However, new reports of bank profits will.  If banks are perceived as fully recovered while the rest of America struggles, it will only further the sense of collusion between Wall Street and Washington, D.C.

whether you defend the Obama administrtion's actions in the financial sector or not, this is a principle that te Obama administration itself seems to realize.  I mean, at least sort of recognizes.  This is why, bracing for new reports on bank profits, the Obama administration is considering moving up the timetable to impose a tax on the financial sector that will recoup federal losses from the bailout:

The White House is considering a tax on financial institutions to ensure that taxpayers who bailed out banks get paid back, a senior administration official said Monday.

The law that created the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program empowered the president to ask Congress to recoup money if bailouts were not paid back in full.

TARP dictates that the Office of Management and Budget consider such action five years after TARP went into effect in October 2008 to prevent the federal bailout from adding to the deficit.

This tax would affect the entire financial sector, not just those firms that received bailout money.  The Obama administration is considering putting the tax into the fiscal year 2011 next year's budget.  Any announcement will likely come at the  State of the Union speech.

It is a necessary first step, and worth applauding.  However, they have to go much further in picking public fights with the financial sector.  The Obama administration has to take the lead for the entire Democratic Party is creating a culprit for the current problems the nation faces. That culprit needs to be "the banks," or some other populist term for large financial institutions.

Without a convincing culprit, the people in charge--aka, Democrats--will bear the brunt of the blame for our economic problems.  Even though the Bush administration is still less than one year behind us, Republicans do not work as a culprit.  People want results quickly. Arguments about how much worse it would have been under Republicans, or about how recoveries take time, are entirely abstract when compared to the real economic conditions people face.

In lieu of a quick recovery, Democrats need to play up  the banks and large financial institutions as the roadblock. While that should not be a hard sell--it is, after all, true-- they need to set themselves up as the people who are fighting the banks and the large financial institutions. That is more difficult for an administration that seems entirely averse to picking public fights, and for large segments of a party that actively collude with them.  Still, creating jobs (the jobs bill is up next in the Senate after health care) and picking a fight with banks it is the only path to a less than disastrous midterm election for the Democratic Party.  This tax is a first step down that path.

It is time to learn to govern out of anger, or else we won't be given another chance to govern at all.

Chris Bowers :: Obama administration braces for reports of bank profits by weighing new financial tax

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Betrayal is a good and understood form of anger. (0.00 / 0)
It would do all Dems well to express their outrage at being betrayed by both the filibuster thieves on the right of the democrats who kidnapped health reform and the banks who took their bailout money and laughed at us all but most completely at the Dems who gave them money.

A pivot to Main Street, that recognizes that everything they have tried to do has been stolen, predictably to almost anyone, stolen for personal gain, at the expense of worsening the crises they were meant to solve.

Yeah WE all know they "should have known" - but this is where the pivot is.

In any case I agree CB, well written, thank you again.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


Obama should invite banksters back to WH... (0.00 / 0)
and serve them only water in really small glasses or dixie cups.

There is nothing that assuages my anger more than Obama's stern tongue lashings.  


It will all be window-dressing and political ploys (4.00 / 2)
until the administration purges the former wall street execs and their regulatory enablers from their ranks.

Who Obama meets with to set "bank policy" is the truth of the matter and those to whom he turns for consul on these topics were the same folks that helped create the problems.

So, yeah, if Obama gets angry and forces a few resignations, maybe his adminstration can shake the image of being in league with the banksters. Do you expect to see that happen?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


any word on whether (4.00 / 3)
the Obama administration will back the Wall Street transaction fees that the House Populist Caucus is pushing? I assume that Geithner and Summers would deep-six that, but if Obama is really worried about developing a soft on Wall Street image, he should get behind this meausure.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

Bingo (4.00 / 1)
Progressives in Congress and elsewhere should say loudly that bank fees would only be passed on to consumers while this tax would have positive impact in controlling some of the worst financial gambling that got us into this mess. Also, I understand this transaction fee would generate far more income to the government than any bank fee which one presumes would be watered down.

This bank fee idea is like taxing expensive health care plans: it misses the target. In this case, the target is the transaction tax and its benefits. With expensive health care plans, the target is taxing Warren Buffett so he at least pays more in taxes than his secretaries, back to 1950 and 1960 tax rates on the wealthiest .5% of income earners. Obama's bank fee is beyond clueless, it's inept.


[ Parent ]
I posted the same story in quickhits yesterday; here it with the points the source made about both your questions desmoinesdem... (4.00 / 1)
Sorry about the politico link....
This is good news, let's praise it, and help them pivot to Main Street. (Emph. mine)

   EXCLUSIVE: Top administration officials tell Morning Money that President Obama's budget, to be unveiled next month, is likely to include a fee on banks designed to recoup some of the cost taxpayers incurred in the bailout, which specified that the U.S. government should be made whole. This will stop short of a financial transactions tax, and the administration has decided that a tax on compensation packages would be too easily evaded. The officials said the final approach has not been locked down. The chief goal is a fee that is not easily passed along.


http://www.openleft.com/viewQu...

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
It's a good idea (0.00 / 0)
And as a bonus, it'd really help out the British left.

Labour has recently endorsed the idea of a Tobin tax and we put punitive taxes on big bonuses recently, whereas the Tories are still quite closely tied to the City - although plenty of Labour figures did use to have such over-strong conenctions.

If you put in financial reform and London follows, you have the two major financial centres in the world on the same page, squashing much of the problem, and you make it more likely that the left continues (begins?) to govern in Britain.

On the down side, I couldn't put a cigarette paper between Obama and Cameron (support for healthcare, obsession with the deficit, popular with the media, thin on concrete policies, misuse of the word 'progressive', much more conservative than generally assumed), so I don't see much movement being likely here.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
First, tax the banks (0.00 / 0)
then, institute a maximum wage.  See Sam Pizzigati's  Greed and Good: Understanding and Overcoming the Inequality That Limits Our Lives .

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

sounds logical (0.00 / 0)
Reconciliation Is The Best Way To Get A Tax On Big Banks

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.c...


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox