Saturday Night Live Presidents cut video to support Consumer Financial Protection Agency

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Mar 03, 2010 at 12:30

The most recent news on the Consumer Financial Protection agency is an unwritten proposal by Senators Dodd and Croker to house the agency inside the Fed.  The strength and independence of the agency would be in real question if it were housed inside the Fed.

As such, Senator Jack Reed (RI) is promising a committee and floor fight over a stronger CFPA proposal if Senator Dodd goes with this proposal when he releases the bill later this week.

At TAPPED, Tim Fernholz is collecting statements from Senate Banking committee members on what sort of CFPA they favor.  He already has responses from eight of the thirteen Democrats on the banking committee.  In addition to Reed's objections, Senators Schumer and Merkley have been particularly critical of housing the CFPA inside the Fed.

Apart from Senators, Elizabeth Warren had some particularly strong words about housing the CFPA in the Fed:

"My first choice is a strong consumer agency," the Harvard Law professor and federal bailout watchdog said in an interview with the Huffington Post. "My second choice is no agency at all and plenty of blood and teeth left on the floor."

Wow--no wonder people like her so much!

Finally, this is as good a time as any to mention that as a part of my fellowship with the New Organizing Institute, I am working on new media organizing with Americans for Financial Reform.  This also means I am no longer doing any work for any federal candidates.

Release your anger!

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Feb 18, 2010 at 17:32

If you are still looking to comment, and it is still Friday the 19th where you live, you can submit comments directly to the FDIC here.

****

In 2008, the world economy crashed because of excessive risk-taking behavior by banks and other large financial institutions. This wasn't an accident.  Even now, at many of those institutions, the more risks the executives take, the more they are paid.

To stop this behavior, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), is proposing a new regulation that will financially penalize banks that reward executives for taking excessive risks. Before they pass this regulation, they want to hear from the public.

We need to get new regulations like this passed.  So, please, tell the FDIC what you think of this new regulation.  Post a comment to this thread, and we will submit it to the FDIC for you before Friday's deadline.  

We checked with the FDIC, and confirmed they would accept comments in this form.  If you don't have an account, just sign up and make one.  It is quick and easy.

The banking industry is still doling out huge bonuses for excessive risk, and has spent tens of millions of dollars on lobbying against regulations such as these.  We can never outspend them, or even equal them.  The only weapon we have against them is our populist anger.

So, follow the advice of the Emperor in Star Wars, and release your anger. Post a comment to this article, and tell the FDIC what you think of banks rewarding executives who take excessive risks that lead to economic catastrophe.

Off-topic comments will be deleted.  Also, don't make any threats or incitements to violence.  Still, when voters aren't angry, politicians don't respond.  So, don't be gentle.

Please post a comment, and may the force be with you!

Update: In the comments, lutton raises an important question:

Don't most of these public comments require real name/ID/address to prevent astroturfing?

I'll be glad to post a comment here either way, but are there alternatives avenues those of us with pseudonymous IDs should consider?

Now, I was told it would be fine.  However, if, just to be sure, you would like to provide your name and location, that is good, too.

Will Democrats Reinstate Glass-Steagall?

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Mar 25, 2009 at 18:09

''Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century,'' Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said.

That was Larry Summers in November of 1999. Now, here is Larry Summers's boss last month:

"We can no longer sustain 21st-century markets with 20th-century regulations," Obama said following an Oval Office meeting with his top lieutenants and the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate panels overseeing the financial industry.

Um, didn't your chief economic advisor tell us ten years ago that we already achieved that goal? And it's not just Summers. Virtually every person involved with drafting the new regulations supported increasing de-regulation ten years ago. That shouldn't give anyone who hopes to prevent another cycle of speculative bubble rise and fall much confidence.

The best we can hope for is that Larry Summers, and everyone else who supported the Deregulate The Financial Sector bill ten years ago, have learned from their mistakes. Apropos, a question on whether the administration will repeal the 1999 Financial Modernization Act and reinstate Glass-Steagall is the top, non-marijuana related question in the Financial Stability section of Open For Questions at Whitehouse.gov. Go vote for it. It is a question that needs an answer.