Bring back Glass-Stegall (Brown, Sanders, Whitehouse, Obama)

[walidm]

Originally Posted by Ferd

i am sooooooo with you.

republicans got rid of it (with help from Clinton) and when democrats had a chance to bring it back, they instead came up with a really dumb massive bill that doesnt work.

Interesting.

You do realize Dimon and J.P. Morgan have lead the charge against regulation with an army of lobbyists and lawyers working overtime to eviscerate the rules while creating as many exceptions, exemptions, and loopholes as they can to continue doing business.

[txgolfer130]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

Ecuador asked for increased regulation as noted in my post and the US was among those shooting it down. The US REJECTED the plea for more regulation from Ecuador.

This is from the GATS Article XVI:

2. Domestic Regulation
(a) Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Agreement, a Member shall not be prevented from taking measures for prudential reasons, including for the protection of investors, depositors, policy holders or persons to whom a fiduciary duty is owed by a financial service supplier, or to ensure the integrity and stability of the financial system. Where such measures do not conform with the provisions of the Agreement, they shall not be used as a means of avoiding the Member's commitments or obligations under the Agreement.

However that was not the main reason for the U.S.'s objection to their request. Ecuador in their updating of their constitution outlined an internal bias for domestic production, and raising of tariff's and restriction based solely on domestic economic/manufacturing and financial requirements/goals re: foreign investment and markets/goods sales opportunities by member countries.

And THAT'S WHY the U.S. objected.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by walidm

Interesting.

You do realize Dimon and J.P. Morgan have lead the charge against regulation with an army of lobbyists and lawyers working overtime to eviscerate the rules while creating as many exceptions, exemptions, and loopholes as they can to continue doing business.

well that there is a strange statment addressed to me.

dont really know what to do with it.


I stated in my post that you quoted that republicans and democrats alike are at fault for doing all the wrong stuff and not doing all the right stuff.

I dont care who is lobbing for or against sanity in government. I just want sanity in government.

The fact is, both wrong over regulation and wrong under regulation caused the financial crisis.

we need modest but effective regulation that neither overstepps nor ignors bad behavior.

All we seem to be getting from Washington on the subject is stupidity.

[BentBow]

Originally Posted by Hot_Handz

Reinstating the Glass-Steagall act is in direct violation of the WTO. It would have to conform to the WTO. Pretty much making it NOT the Glass-Steagall act..

http://www.citizen.org/documents/Fin...SheetFINAL.pdf

Well now!

It seems the root of all our evils is right there in a nutshell.

Getting rid of the WTO and making it so banks are back under Glass Steagall we kill two evil birds with one stone, back when it all worked and we were the powerhouse of economic power.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by BentBow

Well now!

It seems the root of all our evils is right there in a nutshell.

Getting rid of the WTO and making it so banks are back under Glass Steagall we kill two evil birds with one stone, back when it all worked and we were the powerhouse of economic power.

You can kiss those days goodbye.

[BentBow]

Why do we need the WTO, when we didn't need them before?

[BigJon3475]

Originally Posted by Ferd

i am sooooooo with you.

republicans got rid of it (with help from Clinton) and when democrats had a chance to bring it back, they instead came up with a really dumb massive bill that doesnt work.

Here, let me remind you:

2001

• April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002

• May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

• February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.
  
• September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
  
• September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)
  
• October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)
  
• November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

• February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
  
• February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
  
• April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)
  
• June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

• April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
  
• July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)

2007

• August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
  
• August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)
  
• December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008

• February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
  
• March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
  
• April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
  
• May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
  • "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
    
  • "[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
    
  • "Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
• June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
  
• July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
  
• September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

[Donna-501]

Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal

When GWB tried to bring it back the Democrats repeatedly blocked him.

The republicans had how long under Bush?

[Edmund_Burke]

Originally Posted by txgolfer130

That is complete bunk.

So is claiming GOP was only ones responsible, last I checked bill Clinton could've veto it.

[txgolfer130]

Originally Posted by Edmund_Burke

So is claiming GOP was only ones responsible, last I checked bill Clinton could've veto it.

No, but attempting to claim that W 1) tried to bring it back, and 2) that democrats blocked him IS.

However, while we're on the subject ~ the GOP including McCain lobbied aggressively for the GLB bill and were letting corp's and banks already start on their M&A prior to it's passage and through relaxation of G-S rules/regulations.

And just for ****s & grins...the REPUBLICAN Controlled Congress had a veto-proof majority and threatened to override ANY veto. The deal was struck w/ the Congress that if he signed the bill, they would leave the CRA alone.

And so it was written, so shall it be done.

Schools out.