Obama embraces new "bi-partisan" Wall Street deregulation bill that 25 Senate Dems voted against!

[Better Believe It]

Jobs Act: White House, Democrats at odds over Obama-backed pro-business bill
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
March 26, 2012

White House allies are in an uproar over pro-business legislation embraced by President Obama, exposing a new rift in his relations with Democratic lawmakers and supporters amid his efforts since the fall to mend those ties.

The bill is designed to make it easier for growing companies to raise money and reduce the cost of complying with securities laws. But critics warn it would allow firms to avoid disclosing crucial financial information and elude government oversight, opening the door to fraud and investor abuse. The measure is set to pass Congress on Tuesday.

Richard Trumka, AFL-CIO president, said last week that the bill “will do nothing to create good jobs and stabilize the U.S. economy. Instead, it will deregulate Wall Street — voiding investor protections put in place after Enron and the 2008 financial crisis.”

Barbara Roper, director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America, said in a statement, “The White House, which pushed for passage of a bipartisan bill regardless of its attack on investor protections, and Senate leadership .?.?. bear a heavy burden of responsibility for the damage this bill will cause to vulnerable investors.”


Read the full article at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/jobs-act-white-house-democrats-at-odds-over-pro-business-bill-set-to-pass/2012/03/26/gIQAfnq3cS_story.html


---------------------------------------------------------------------



News Release
Contact: Barbara Roper
March 22, 2012


Senate Flip-Flops on Investor Protection, Passes JOBS Act They Know
Will Harm Investors and Increase Fraud


Ignoring warnings from securities regulators, institutional investors, IPO experts and a host of other individuals and organizations, the Senate voted 73-26 Thursday to approve the House-passed JOBS Act, setting the stage for it to be signed into law without needed improvements to its dangerously lacking investor protections. The vote on final passage came after an amendment was adopted to strengthen investor protections related to crowd-funding and another amendment to limit the ability of large companies to evade public disclosure obligations was defeated. Because the bill was brought up under a procedure that limited the opportunity for amendments, and because the Reed-Landrieu-Levin substitute amendment fell six votes short of the 60 needed to invoke cloture when it was brought up earlier this week, the vast bulk of the bill’s anti-investor provisions went unaddressed. CFA Director of Investor Protection Barbara Roper issued the following statement in response:

“In recent weeks, a growing chorus of critics from securities regulators to IPO market experts to institutional investors has warned that the House-passed JOBS Act would increase fraud, undermine market transparency, and damage our capital markets. They joined with seniors, workers, consumers, and Main Street businesses in calling on the Senate to slow down this juggernaut and adopt a more balanced approach that preserves vital investor protections. By voting for the Reid-Landrieu-Levin substitute amendment Tuesday, 54 senators signaled that they had heard those warnings and recognized the bill to be deeply flawed. Unfortunately, 28 of those senators turned around just two days later and voted for the House bill despite its predicted damaging effect on investors and on markets.

“While we strongly supported the pro-investor amendment on crowd-funding and are grateful it was adopted, this change alone was insufficient to justify support for the broader bill. On the contrary, even with this change, the bill will still unleash a new wave of damaging fraud in the private offering market, make it easier to commit accounting fraud, reignite the abusive securities analyst practices that fueled the tech stock boom and bust, undermine comparability of financial reporting, and enable the Regulation A small offering exemption to be gamed by mid-sized companies seeking to evade public reporting requirements, to name just a few of its many short-comings. The White House, which pushed for passage of a bipartisan bill regardless of its attack on investor protections, and Senate leadership, which brought the bill to the floor with no meaningful opportunity for pro-investor amendments, bear a heavy burden of responsibility for the damage this bill will cause to vulnerable investors and our fragile capital markets. Unfortunately, it is the public who will suffer the consequences.

“The following senators – who voted to improve the bill’s investor protections and voted against final passage when efforts to improve investor protections failed – deserve credit for taking a stand to protect investors, prevent fraud, and promote market transparency and integrity,” Roper said.

1.Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI)
2.Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT)
3.Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK)
4.Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
5.Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
6.Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
7.Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)
8.Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)
9.Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL)
10.Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
11.Sen. Al Franken (D-MN)
12.Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
13. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
14.Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
15.Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
16.Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
17.Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI)
18.Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
19.Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)
20.Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA)
21.Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI)
22.Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
23.Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-VT)
24.Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM)
25.Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA)
26.Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)



“When, as predicted, this legislation unleashes a new wave of damaging investment fraud on the unsuspecting public, these senators, and particularly Senators Reed, Landrieu, and Levin, will know that they did everything in their power to stop it,” Roper said.

http://consumerfed.org/news/475

[Enrique]

1. did he even get anything for it?

like all these things he supposedly wants but oh gee the Republicans keep blocking him. How about, you want this "pro-business" pile of shit, ok but you have to give me something. No, it doesn't seem to work that way, the GOP gets stuff for free.

[Better Believe It]

2. Probably more campaign donations from big financial interests.

[ProSense]

5. Actually

"Probably more campaign donations from big financial interests."

...the Republicans appear to have a lock on that: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002472623

[fascisthunter]

6. great, what do we all get?

exactly....

[Better Believe It]

9. A pony!

[ProSense]

3. I wouldn't

call it a "Wall Street deregulation bill."

The bill didn't end up in conference as I anticipated: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=467810

In fact, it just passed the House with a few progressive votes, including:

DeFazio
Ellison
Frank
Waters

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll132.xml

[girl gone mad]

7. It is absolutely a Wall Street deregulation bill..

and it's even worse than most critics imagine it to be.

The JOBS Act Is So Criminogenic That It Guarantees Full-Time Jobs for Criminologists

As white-collar criminologists (and a former financial regulator and enforcement head) and experts in ferreting out sophisticated financial frauds, our careers and research focus on financial fraud by the world's most elite private sector criminals and their political cronies. Therefore, we write to thank Congress and the President for preparing to adopt a JOBS Act that will provide us with job security for life. We will be the personal beneficiaries of Congress' decision to adopt the law without the pesky hearings that would allow critics to launch devastating attacks on the proposed bill based on a brutally unfair tactic - the presentation of facts. Unfortunately, in our professional capacities, we must oppose the bill. This bill is an atrocity.

The "Jumpstart Our Business Startups" Act, the comically forced effort to create a catchy acronym, is the most cynical bill to emerge from a cynical Congress and Administration. It is an exemplar of why congressional approval ratings are well below those of used car dealers. The JOBS Act is something only a financial scavenger could love. It will create a fraud-friendly and fraud-enhancing environment. It will add to the unprecedented level of financial fraud by our most elite CEOs that has devastated the U.S. and European economies and cost over 20 million people their jobs. Financial fraud is a prime jobs killer.

Powerful regulatory regimes -- strong accounting rules, strict corporate governance, tough securities laws, and vigorous civil and criminal enforcement of the regulations and laws is the greatest infrastructure for strong economic growth that a nation can provide. For decades, the U.S. had an enormous competitive advantage over other nations in raising funds through securities because investors placed great trust in issuers that were subject to effective regulation. U.S. equities traded at a substantial premium compared to securities issued in other nations (which means that companies could raise capital much more effectively and inexpensively). Regulators serve as the "cops on the beat" that prevent a Gresham's Dynamic in which "bad ethics drives good ethics out of the markets."

Our system worked brilliantly. America prospered. American businesses and investors prospered. Unfortunately, economists decided to destroy what worked and to replace it with a fraud-friendly, deregulated world. Alan Greenspan was only the most prominent high priest of the following dogma: "a rule against fraud is not an essential or ... an important ingredient of securities markets" (Easterbrook & Fischel 1991). This faith-based economics had no basis in reality, but it led to aggressive anti-regulatory leaders whose policies were so criminogenic that they led to recurrent and ever-larger serious financial crises.

read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/jobs-act_b_1366565.html

But I'm sure after the next crisis and collapse, the hired guns will turn up to demand another taxpayer funded bailout and whine "No one could have seen it coming!"

[ProSense]

8. This

is Wall Street regulation:

Banks’ preemptive strike against Dodd-Frank

By Suzy Khimm

When Deutsche Bank reorganized its U.S. operations this week in response to new banking rules, it was the latest manifestation of what both supporters and opponents of the Dodd-Frank regulatory overhaul predicted would happen: The law has pushed big banks to reorganize — to comply with the new rules on Wall Street, as well as to avoid their impact...Deutsche Bank and London-based Barclays have moved their commercial banks from their U.S. subsidiaries into their global firms to avoid new, more stringent capital requirements — even though they don’t go into effect until July 2015.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean that Dodd-Frank has fallen short of what its authors intended. By giving up its status as a U.S. bank holding company, Deutsche Bank is forfeiting its access to the Federal Reserve’s emergency lending window. Doing so effectively cuts itself out of any future government-backed bailout in the event of a crisis. One of the overarching goals of Dodd-Frank was limiting taxpayer exposure to bailing out big firms.

“They’re saying, ‘If this is the price we have to pay, we’re going to shed that protection — we’re not too big to fail,’ ” said University of Maryland law professor Michael Greenberger, a former regulator at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Deutsche Bank was the Fed’s second-largest discount-window borrower during the 2008-2009 crisis.

<...>

The Volcker Rule, which is scheduled to take effect in July, also prohibits banks from providing more than 3 percent of capital in private-equity or hedge funds, prompting banks to spin off those operations as well. Other Dodd-Frank rules recently prompted insurance giant MetLife to sell its FDIC-insured banking unit, which would have subjected the firm to greater regulation and scrutiny by the Federal Reserve.

- more -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/banks-preemptive-strike-against-dodd-frank/2012/03/23/gIQATnUmWS_story.html

I simply do not agree that the change in the OP bill, with the Merkley amendment in place, will undermine the massive Wall Street reform law.

[fascisthunter]

4. is he brainwashed by a few economists who have his ear?

THIS SHIT DOES NOT WORK...! WTF!!!! It's short-term shit like this that is destroying this country.... helloooooo... anyone home????

[kenny blankenship]

10. Enabling stock boilerroom fraud factories is what they call a JOBS bill

At this late point in the con, no one has a right to feel swindled anymore. It's been too brazen, too often.

[AtomicKitten]

11. It is bipartisan; it passed the House 390-23 including Pelosi's 'yea' vote.

http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/house/2/110

[Better Believe It]

13. The House just passed the Senate amendment to the bill 380 to 41 with 11 not voting. Roll Call Vote

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 132
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

H R 3606 2/3 YEA-AND-NAY 27-Mar-2012 2:17 PM
QUESTION: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Concur in the Senate Amendment
BILL TITLE: To increase American job creation and economic growth by improving access to the public capital markets for emerging growth companies



---- YEAS 380 ---

Ackerman
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Dicks
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellison
Ellmers
Emerson
Eshoo
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Honda
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Long
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luján
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Marino
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quayle
Quigley
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Webster
Welch
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)



---- NAYS 41 ---

Becerra
Berman
Brady (PA)
Capuano
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cohen
Cummings
Deutch
Dingell
Doyle
Edwards
Filner
Fudge
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hinchey
Holden
Holt
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kildee
Kucinich
Lee (CA)
Markey
McCollum
McDermott
Miller, George
Nadler
Napolitano
Olver
Pastor (AZ)
Pingree (ME)
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Scott (VA)
Stark
Tierney
Visclosky
Waxman
Woolsey



---- NOT VOTING 10 ---

Akin
Diaz-Balart
Engel
Flores
Jackson (IL)
Landry
Mack
Marchant
Neal
Rangel



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll132.xml

[SidDithers]

12. Keep trying...nt

Sid

[Karmadillo]

14. Zing!

nt

[Better Believe It]

15. Here's the Senate roll call vote on the Wall Street deregulation bill.

Vote Summary
Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 3606 As Amended )
Vote Date:
March 22, 2012, 12:59 PM


Measure Number:

H.R. 3606 (Reopening American Capital Markets to Emerging Growth Companies Act of 2011 )

Measure Title:

A bill to increase American job creation and economic growth by improving access to the public capital markets for emerging growth companies.

Vote Counts:

YEAs
73

NAYs
26

Not Voting
1


YEAs ---73

Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagan (D-NC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lee (R-UT)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Udall (D-CO)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (D-VA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)


NAYs ---26

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cardin (D-MD)
Conrad (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Udall (D-NM)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)


Not Voting - 1

Kirk (R-IL)

[Better Believe It]

16. Obama Administration takes credit for pro-fraud legislation calling it a "bipartisan jobs measure"

Democrats Realize Pro-Fraud Legislation Not in Their Interests
By: David Dayen
March 27, 2012

After both houses of Congress passed it, the White House is finally recognizing that the deregulatory bill they proposed and pushed is distasteful to liberals who have actually looked at it for longer than two seconds:

There are only two ways to look at the JOBS Act. Either you agree with the Republican critique that regulations are a boot stamping on a human face forever, something the White House has rejected over and over again, or you think the economy will be served by a pro-fraud bill, a bill that makes it easier for companies to bilk investors and for Wall Street financiers to facilitate it. Neither makes the White House come off looking good.

The Administration took credit for the JOBS Act last week, and this article fleshes out more details about its origin. Apparently it’s a holdover from the dark Bill Daley days.

As Bill Black writes, most pro-fraud legislation ends up being bipartisan. Republicans are down for whatever pro-fraud bits they can get for their constituency. So when Democrats support something, it’s sure to get votes. And since Washington chases bipartisanship like a tiger chases its tail, you end up with legislation like this, that can be called a “bipartisan jobs measure” if you stretch the definition to its very limits.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/03/27/democrats-realize-pro-fraud-legislation-not-in-their-interests/