Senator Elizabeth Warren (photo: AP)
11 December 14
eople
are frustrated with Congress. Part of the reason, of course, is
gridlock. But mostly it’s because they see a Congress that works just
fine for the big guys but won’t lift a finger to help them.
And now the House of Representatives is about to show us the worst of government for the rich and powerful.
The House is about to vote on a budget deal – a
deal negotiated behind closed doors that slips in a provision that
would let derivatives traders on Wall Street gamble with taxpayer money,
and once again get bailed out by the government when their risky bets
threaten to blow up our financial system.
These are the same banks that nearly broke this
economy in 2008 and destroyed millions of jobs. The same banks that got
bailed out by taxpayers and are now raking in record profits. The same
banks that are spending a whole lot of time and money trying to
influence Congress to bend the rules in their favor.
You will hear a lot of folks say that the rule that
will be repealed in the Omnibus is technical and complicated, and that
you shouldn’t worry about it because smart people who know more than you
about financial issues say that it’s no big deal. Don’t believe them.
Actually, the rule is pretty simple. Here’s what it’s
called – the rule that the House is about to repeal – and I’m quoting
from the text of Dodd-Frank – “PROHIBITION AGAINST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
BAILOUTS OF SWAPS ENTITIES.”
We put this rule in place after the collapse of the
financial system because we wanted to reduce the risk that reckless
gambling on Wall Street could ever again threaten jobs and livelihoods
on Main Street. We put this rule in place because people of all
political persuasions were disgusted at the prospects of future
bailouts.
And now, no debate, no discussion, Republicans in the
House of Representatives are threatening to shut down the government if
they don’t get a chance to repeal it.
That raises a simple question – why? If this rule
brings more stability to our financial system, if this rule prevents
future government bailouts, why in the world would anyone want to repeal
it, let alone hold the entire government hostage in order to ram
through the repeal?
The reason, unfortunately, is simple. It’s about
money, and it’s about power. Because while this legal change could pose
serious risks to our entire economy, it’ll also make a lot of money for
Wall Street banks.
Wall Street isn’t subtle about this one – according to
documents reviewed by the New York Times, the original bill that is
being incorporated into the House’s spending legislation today was
literally written by Citigroup lobbyists, who “redrafted” the
legislation, “striking out certain phrases and inserting others.”
I know that House and Senate negotiators from both
parties have worked long and hard to come to an agreement on the omnibus
spending legislation. And Senate leaders deserve great credit for
preventing the House from carrying out some of their more aggressive
fantasies about dismantling even more pieces of financial reform.
But this provision goes too far. Citigroup is large,
and it is powerful. But it is a single, private company. It shouldn’t
get to hold the entire government hostage – to threaten a government
shutdown – in order to roll back important protections that keep our
economy safe.
This is a democracy, and the American people didn’t
elect us to stand up for Citigroup. They elected us to stand up for all
of the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment