Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Glass Steagall Not Impossible

Posted 6 years ago on June 1, 2012, 7:39 p.m. EST by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Yesterday, The Hill ran a story entitled: “Senate Dems not with Warren on reinstating Glass-Steagall Bank Act”.

The article makes the point that some Senate Democratic leaders are reluctant to challenge Wall Street by reinstating Glass-Steagall, due to their desire for Wall Street campaign contributions.

However, former Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND), whom the Hill characterizes as having been the Senate's most outspoken defender of Glass-Steagall while in Congress, is then quoted as saying that Warren should expect a forceful pushback from Wall Street, but that reinstating Galss Steagall is not impossible.

"It's very hard, because you're taking on Wall Street, and Wall Street has substantial clout in Congress," he said. "They were able to substantially dilute Dodd-Frank. Even what it required was fought bitterly by Wall Street. It will be hard to get it done but not impossible. There are plenty of members of the caucus who believe you have to re-impose Glass-Steagall. It is one of the few proposed reforms of Wall Street to draw bipartisan support."

The Hill then reports that Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and John McCain (R-AZ) introduced legislation in 2010 to restore the safeguards of Glass-Steagall, and that Sen. Richard Shelby (AL), the ranking Republican on the Banking Committee, voted against the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999.

Some advocates of re-enacting Glass-Steagall believe doing so could become politically viable if Republicans such as McCain, Shelby, and Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), sign on to the effort.

Here is an excerpt from Sen Dorgan's prophetic speech on the floor of the Senate in '99 during the debate over Gramm-Leach-Bliley:

SEN. BYRON DORGAN: “We are, with this piece of legislation, moving towards greater risk. We are almost certainly moving towards substantial new concentration and mergers in the financial services industry, that is almost certainly not in the interests of consumers. And we are deliberately and certainly, with this legislation, moving towards inheriting much greater risk in our financial services industries. And so, I come to the floor to say that I regret that I cannot support the legislation. I think we will, in 10 years’ time, look back and say we should not have done that, because we forgot the lessons of the past.”



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago

Congress is bought and paid for!

The government is out of control and both sides keep electing the same type of people that support the same policies on Wall Street.

Why anyone choose Barry O or Hillary over a real candidate like Dennis Kucinich in 2008 is beyond me. It makes as much sense as the repubs choosing Romney, a person they don't even like themselves.

Money is a powerful thing. Especially when Goldman Sachs is backing both candidates.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

I would prefer Dennis Kucinich myself, but would rather see Hilary than Obama.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 6 years ago

The only difference Hilary and Obama have is Hilary made a promise Black Water and organizations like Black Water would never be used again. Whereas Obama's administration has used Black Water for huge budget contracts in Afghanistan. In my opinion. And Hilary also told us there were WMD's in Iraq. She was one of the originators of the "if we knew now what we knew then" people after the failure to find WMD's in Iraq. And she also suggested that Iraq was a threat just like Bill did in 1998. And then war happened during the Bush administration due to him and congress, even though it was an obvious war of aggression.

And now the republicans and democrats in congress are preparing for war with Iran on the claim of a WMD threat. HR 4310 is a big deal yet it has gotten ZERO media coverage. Sections 1221 and 1222 prepare for war with Iran.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 6 years ago

I love Dorgan, I seen that speech a while back, and in retrospect, his prediction was an eery warning of things to come, and in 2008, it came (it just came 1 year ahead of his prediction).