Senate now voting on Merkley-Klobuchar amendment to financial reform bill

[flpoljunkie]

This amendment requires income verification for mortgage borrowers.

[Autumn]

1. I thought that was already required. We have always

had to provide income verification when we got any mortgage loan.

[Kdillard]

2. Yeah I thought for any type of loan there is income verification.

[zipplewrath]

4. Not the subprime ones

In the end, there were banks issuing mortgages with no verification required. Interest rates were a bit higher, but they were then bundling them with "normal" mortgages and selling them all together. They were some of the quickest to go belly up.

[Kdillard]

9. Thanks for that information. It is amazing the kind of shady practices the

Banks have gotten away with for years.

[Autumn]

5. All typical bullshit, then they expect a pat on the back

I have never gotten any type of loan that didn't require income verification.

[flpoljunkie]

3. Elizabeth Warren has said the financial crisis began 'one bad mortgage at a time.'

These were called 'liars' loans' or 'NINJA' loans--no income, no job. They were peddled by unscrupulous mortgage broker and various banks.

People who were eligible for a prime loan were also put in subprime loans and, shall we say, taken advantage of by these same shysters.

[Autumn]

6. So one can borrow money without income

verification? Is it legal?

[flpoljunkie]

7. Obviously, yes.

[mopinko]

27. i think they were nicknamed liar's loans

you just had to state your income, but did not have to verify it at all. everyone involved knew that people were lying.

[flpoljunkie]

8. Some Republicans voting yes.

[flpoljunkie]

10. Amendment agreed to. 63 Ayes. 36 Nos.

[Kdillard]

11. Good news. It seems like it will stop a very bad practice.

[annabanana]

21. Amazing that there were ANY "no" votes on this....

This looks like fertile ground for campaign Miracle Grow. . . or at least campaign manure.

[flpoljunkie]

12. Bob Corker's bill requiring 5% mortgage down payment also strips out 'skin in the game.'

How interesting!

It will fail, of course.

[flpoljunkie]

13. Bayh voting with the R's. Banks don't like the 'skin in the game' requirement.

[flpoljunkie]

14. Amendment fails with 42 Ayes and 57 Nos!

[Raine1967]

16. Unbelievable. Simply Stunning.

the fact that this had to be added as an amendment was shocking enough, but it failed.

Terrible.

[flpoljunkie]

17. Not what it seemed! It was an amendment only the banks could love. It strips out 'skin in the game.'

This amendment was exactly what big banks want. The R's are working hard for the banking lobbyists, and not for you!

[annabanana]

22. how so?. . .And how far into the weeds to we have to wade to

figure it out?

[flpoljunkie]

34. Banks want to continue to sell mortgages for bundling with 'no skin the game.'

They made a bundle selling these toxic mortgages that were bundled and sold. They should ask for 'more skin in the game'--like when banks kept mortgages rather than just turning them over for a profit to the shysters who brought us CDO's and credit default swaps.

The banks' lobbyists are swarming. This is one they definitely want to kill.

[flpoljunkie]

15. Hutchison amendment supported by Klobuchar up for vote. Dodd opposes.

This amendment calls for supervisory control of small and community banks by regional Federal Reserve banks.

[flpoljunkie]

18. Amendment agreed to. Ayes are 90. Nos are 9.

[Kdillard]

19. I don't know if I like this as I prefer smaller banks to keep their control and

They weren't the cause of the crisis.

[flpoljunkie]

20. Landrieu's 'Skin in the Game' amendment up next. She has asked for a voice vote.

Dodd is going to lay the Landrieu amendment aside temporarily for Olympia Snowe to offer her amendment to exempt certain small businesses (not payday lenders) from the financial regulatory reform bill.

Snowe's amendment will be temporarily set aside, as well. Senator Roland Burris is speaking.

[digidigido]

23. when I bought a house I had 25% down and no income verification. I worked

as a musician, and that made it possible for me to buy a home......... for my now ex wife

[flpoljunkie]

24. So, Dorgan is proposing to ban 'naked' default swaps--which he says are 70-80% of swaps. Yikes!

Saxby Chambliss is proposing all swaps transactions be made known to regulators. This is not the same as Blanche Lincoln's proposal for derivatives that have been incorporated into the Dodd bill. Chambliss says he's 'protecting Main Street.' Of course, the R's have zero credibility on protecting Main Street from big business.

[flpoljunkie]

25. Blanche Lincoln now speaking against Saxby Chambliss' derivatives amendment.

[flpoljunkie]

26. TPM: Something To Keep An Eye On

Indeed!

Something To Keep An Eye On ...

David Kurtz | May 12, 2010, 3:23PM

Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) is on the Senate floor now touting her tough derivatives amendment to the financial reform bill. But there's more going on here than meets the eye. The key question is: Will the Senate vote on Lincoln's amendment before next Tuesday's primary in Arkansas, where she is locked in a close race with Lt. Gov. Bill Halter?

The consensus is that Lincoln's amendment, which surprised everyone as way tougher than expected when it was unveiled last month, will be significantly watered down before all is said and done. Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), the Democratic leadership, and the White House are all in favor of a weaker regulatory regimen.

The only question is when Lincoln's amendment is retooled, and it's now appearing that the vote on the amendment will be delayed until after Tuesday's election to protect Lincoln and not water down her anti-Wall Street message.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/05/something_to_keep_an_eye_on.php?ref=fpblg

[chill_wind]

28. Thank you flpoljunkie for following so closely

and keeping us informed. I haven't caught any of the deliberations today -- (about to grab the wireless
headphones now so I can listen while working on other chores away from the laptop.)

K & R!

:hi:

[Jennicut]

30. I second that. Thanks flpoljunkie!

My kids are watching Cinderella right now, no C-Span for me.

[flpoljunkie]

33. Thanks. Maria Cantwell is explaining the history of derivatives-how they were snuck into a bill in

1999 in the dead of night (Thanks to Republican Phil Gramm) and how they have grown exponentially.

[Jennicut]

36. Ugg, I remeber that tool all too well.

I watch politics more closely now but I remember never liking him back in 1999 (I was 23 and just finishing college).

[flpoljunkie]

32. Have not kept up totally myself. But, as Biden might say, 'This is a big f*cking deal!'

:hi:

[druidity33]

29. K&R, nt.

[flpoljunkie]

31. Cantwell speaking against the Chambliss substitute to Blanche Lincoln's derivatives bill.

Disturbing to hear that Shelby says NAM, the National Association of Manufacturers, considers this a 'key vote.' That means Big Business wants it, not Main Street.

Robert Reich is a strong supporter of Blanche's derivatives bill.

Lincoln to the Rescue

As to the risk you and I might be left holding the bag again, Volcker says not to worry: His own rule now contained in the Dodd bill, preventing bankers from making bets for their own accounts, would take care of that. But Volcker's rule would not erode the giant banks' monopoly over derivatives trading -- making them too big to fail. By contrast, Lincoln's provision, by pushing derivative trading out of commercial banking, would remove the big banks' artificial advantage, resulting in more competition and a better capitalized derivatives market.

Another argument being disingenuously used by Lincoln's opponents is her measure would push derivative trading into unregulated shadow markets. That's nonsense. Derivatives would have to be traded through a central clearinghouse or exchange, and every dealer in derivatives would still have to be registered and regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Corporation or by the SEC.

So what are Lincoln's chances? All the big guns are aiming at her. Lobbyists are lined up against her. Republicans and many Democrats who want to do the Street's bidding are eager to get rid of Lincoln's measure. But she has two things going for her. First is the awkwardness for the White House if the President were to come out explicitly against her. For many weeks the Administration has talked about the importance of being tough on derivatives. The President has even said he'll veto any bill that doesn't go far enough regulating them. Now Lincoln is giving the White House a chance to prove its mettle or show itself to be pandering to the Street on one of the biggest reasons the Street almost melted down in the fall of 2008.

The second advantage Lincoln has is her measure passed her committee with so much momentum -- including the votes of every Democrat on the panel and one Republican -- that it's been included in Dodd's overall financial reform bill. While it's always possible for opponents of reform to hide when amendments are voted down, it's much harder to hide when trying to strip a provision from a bill. Democrats who want to do so will have to join Republican Senators Judd Gregg, Saxby Chambliss, and Bob Corker, who already have introduced an amendment to accomplish this on behalf of their Wall Street patrons. The public will be able to identify which Senate Democrats care more about Wall Street's campaign donations than the public good.

Volcker has given these Democrats, and the White House, some cover. But the public is watching closely. Some cover may not be enough.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/lincoln-to-the-rescue_b_572754.html

[flpoljunkie]

35. Senate now voting on Republican Saxby Chambliss' bill to regulate derivatives.

[flpoljunkie]

37. Grassley and Snowe vote No with the Dems.

[BootinUp]

38. thats it? just 2.

I would have expected more on that one.

[flpoljunkie]

39. Vote ongoing, but there may not be any more.

[flpoljunkie]

40. Chambliss amendment fails. 39 Ayes and 59 Nays.

[flpoljunkie]

44. Link to roll call vote. Grassley and Snowe only R's voting with the Dems. No Des voted Yes.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00144

[flpoljunkie]

41. Reed/Scott Brown amendment up next. It should pass handily! Perhaps by voice vote.

It would provide a military liaison in the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency. A great idea! Members of the military are frequently exploited--particularly by payday lenders and used car dealers.

Reed also says 'Rent to Own' is a problem.

Who could defend this scum?

[flpoljunkie]

42. Nope. Looks like they are having a roll call vote.

[flpoljunkie]

43. Crazy Tom Coburn votes No! The only No vote. Amendment passed 98-1!

Would love to hear his rationale!

No more votes this evening, although Sessions, Specter and Collins will be speaking on their amendments which will be voted on tomorrow morning.