Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi just now on MSNBC speaking on banking bill, beginning with derivatives

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 02:55 PM
Original message
Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi just now on MSNBC speaking on banking bill, beginning with derivatives
Edited on Tue Jun-01-10 03:00 PM by flpoljunkie
Taibbi says 'spin-off' provisions in the derivatives legislation--Blanche Lincoln's contribution to the banking bill--will be killed in conference, according to all his sources.

Too bad, MSNBC's Chris Jansing did not ask him about what else he wrote about the derivatives part of the Senate banking bill.

From the Rolling Stone article they were talking about..

When it came time for the Senate to do its version, however, the lobbyists were in for a surprise. Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas – best known as one of the few Democrats to vote for Bush's tax cuts – suddenly got religion and closed the loophole. Facing a tough primary battle against an opponent who was vowing to crack down on Wall Street, Lincoln tweaked the language so derivatives reform would apply to any greedy financial company that makes billions trading risky swaps in the dark.

Republicans went apeshit, pulling the same tactics they tried to gut the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. Sen. Enzi, back at the lectern after his failed attempt to claim that the CFPB was a government plot to control the orthodontics industry, barked to the Senate gallery that Lincoln's proposal would harm not millionaire swap dealers at JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, but "a wheat-grower in Wyoming." Unmoved by such goofy rhetoric, the Senate shot down an asinine Republican amendment that would have overturned Lincoln's reform by a vote of 59-39.

Then reform advocates started reading the fine print of the Lincoln deal, and realized that all those Wall Street lobbyists had really been earning their money.

That same day the GOP amendment failed, the derivatives expert Adam White was at his home in Georgia, poring over a "redline" version of the Lincoln amendment, in which changes to the bill are tracked in bold. When he came to a key passage on page 570, he saw that it had a single line through it, meaning it had been removed. The line read, "Except as provided in paragraph (3), it shall be unlawful to enter into a swap that is required to be cleared unless such swap shall be submitted for clearing."

Translation: It was no longer illegal to trade many uncleared swaps. Wall Street would be free to go on trading these monstrosities by the gazillions, largely in the dark. "Regulators can't say any longer if you don't clear it, it's illegal," says White.

Once he noticed that giant loophole, White went back and found a host of other curlicues in the text that collectively cut the balls out of the Lincoln amendment. On page 574, a new section was added denying the Commodity Futures Trading Commission the power to force clearinghouses to accept swaps for clearing. On page 706, two lines were added making it impossible for buyers who get sold an uncleared swap to void the deal. Taken altogether, the changes amount to what White describes as a "Trojan Horse" amendment: hundreds of pages of rigid rules about clearing swaps, with a few cleverly concealed clauses that make blowing off those rules no big deal. Michael Greenberger, a former official with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission who has been fighting for derivatives reform, describes the textual trickery as a "circle of doom. Despite the pages and pages of regulations, violating them is risk-free."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/;kw=<36899,157778>?RS_show_page=5
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. Not surprising. I hope the bill is fixed in conference.
Anyone with common sense knew that Lincoln's amendment is a cheap primary-election ploy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pscot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. I knew Ms Blanche was up to something shitty
Edited on Tue Jun-01-10 03:13 PM by pscot
If this is the way business is done in the Congress, it really is time to hang a few of these elected criminals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. What did he do to promote himself?
That's always the most interesting part of his interviews.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Critizing Taibbi on something totally unrelated to the substance of the article
only outs you as someone with an agenda, what is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Not a damn thing.
I love folks who blame the messenger when they don't like the message!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-01-10 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. Evidently, Robert Reich doesn't agree with Taibbi
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC