Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill Clinton Is Responsible For Our Current Mess (repealed Glass-Steagall Act)
Chattanoogan ^ | 2/17/10 | Joel Walker

Posted on 02/17/2010 6:01:01 PM PST by Libloather

Bill Clinton Is Responsible For Our Current Mess
posted February 17, 2010

Just as I have been saying all along, this current economic mess in which we find ourselves lies at the feet of Bill Clinton. While I have known this for some time from evidence found through various sources, the fact was driven home last night on a television special. Was it on Fox News? Far from it. It was on the PBS show, "Frontline." Long story short is that the deregulation of the financial industry under Clinton and his Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin, along with their complete refusal to even acknowledge the possibility of a financial meltdown through the unregulated over the counter derivatives markets caused this entire situation.

Despite a major lawsuit by Proctor & Gamble over a derivatives investment scandal in 1994, Clinton and Rubin looked the other way with full knowledge of the fact that the scandal was the tip of the iceberg. In 1998, the new chairperson of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Brooksley Born, brought to the attention of Congress as well as Rubin and Clinton the growing investment by banks in the unregulated over the counter derivatives markets. Rubin and Clinton resoundingly rejected Born's proposal for regulating derivatives despite yet another derivatives scandal of billions of dollars at Long Term Capital Management (LTCM.)

When Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, which then allowed investment banks to merge with commercial banks, the final piece of the puzzle was in place as normally conservative investing banks could then invest heavily in over the counter derivatives markets, much of which was in the form of speculative credit derivatives closely tied to real estate. Much of that real estate had been financed with sub-prime financing with borrowers who could barely buy a doughnut, let alone a house. Thank Barney Frank, D-MA, for this trend.

Once so many bad borrowers had their rates adjusted, the house of cards started to come tumbling down. The default rate started to grow rapidly while many derivatives sold to banks and large institutional investors were based on credit derivatives, basically betting that people and companies would not default on their mortgages. There was little or nothing that George W. Bush could have done as the pieces were already in place for this catastrophe.

Perhaps the severity could have been mitigated somewhat, but the bullet had left the gun long before and there was no bringing it back. How does one "undo" the unregulated, highly speculative investment of hundreds of trillions of dollars by the largest banks and investment banks in the world? The fact is that had Clinton and Rubin simply looked at what was going on and listened to those trying to prevent this disaster, we would be in a far better situation.

You may ask what happened to those in the Treasury who sat by while this happened. Robert Rubin only recently left Citibank after pocketing an estimated $40,000,000 during his time there. Tim Geither, the #3 man at the Treasury while this was going on, is now our illustrious, tax-evading Treasury Secretary. The #2 man under Rubin, Larry Summers, is now serving as the Chief Economic Advisor to Barack Obama. The prisoners are definitely running the jail. Oh, did I mention that Clinton was also given the precise location of Osama bin Laden while military personnel were waiting to launch missiles into that location? He could not be bothered during his fund-raising event as written about by his Nation Security Advisor, Sandy Berger. He failed to do anything to prevent the biggest disasters of the last 80 years. Is there any other way to see it?

Joel Walker


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: blame; clinton; clintonlegacy; economics; economy; frank; glass; glasssteagall; hillary; liberalfascism; liberalprogressivism; politics; steagall; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton speaks during a news conference on the fight against childhood obesity at the offices of the Clinton Foundation in New York February 17, 2010.
1 posted on 02/17/2010 6:01:02 PM PST by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libloather

They like to blame Phil Gramm for that one.


2 posted on 02/17/2010 6:04:12 PM PST by smokingfrog (You can't ignore your boss and expect to keep your job... www.filipthishouse2010.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Oh yeah, they sure do.


3 posted on 02/17/2010 6:05:16 PM PST by FTJM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Clinton also did the “I paid down the national debt” while at the same time his buddy and ex-budget director Franklin Raines ran up staggering debt at Fannie Mae. So, he DIDN’T pay down any debt — he actually dramatically raise the debt setting the stage for this debacle.


4 posted on 02/17/2010 6:06:33 PM PST by whitedog57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Clinton also did the “I paid down the national debt” while at the same time his buddy and ex-budget director Franklin Raines ran up staggering debt at Fannie Mae. So, he DIDN’T pay down any debt — he actually dramatically raise the debt setting the stage for this debacle.


5 posted on 02/17/2010 6:07:12 PM PST by whitedog57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

That might be because Gramm was behind it . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bliley_Act

As a matter of fact, three Republicans were behind it.

parsy, who says there is plenty of Republican blame to go around


6 posted on 02/17/2010 6:07:16 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Phil Graham was indeed involved in it. This legislation was very bipartisan in nature with major input from Greenspan and Rubin.


7 posted on 02/17/2010 6:08:39 PM PST by rsobin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rsobin
"Phil Graham was indeed involved in it. This legislation was very bipartisan in nature with major input from Greenspan and Rubin."

Yep. No one's hands are clean in this mess. I'm all for deregulation - to an extent. It seems that the banking industry was a whole lot more stable - perhaps less sexy, but more stable - when there were more regional banks, and less of these Goliath mega banks.

Also, mortgages really became a mess when they were allowed to be securitized. Before, mortgages were locally originated and locally serviced. If a borrower got into trouble, they had a better chance of going through loan workout, as opposed to instantaneous foreclosure. Sure, there were fewer loans made, but banks made sure that the borrowers were lower risk because the bank held onto the paper for a much longer period of time.

8 posted on 02/17/2010 6:13:44 PM PST by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

I’m glad you picked a reputable source for your claim.

(parsy, who always seems to show up when it’s time to defend the most insidious of liberal behavior.)


9 posted on 02/17/2010 6:14:52 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog
Much here is true, but this needs to get more into the CRA that created all the bad paper that they were then able to turn into derivatives, CMO's etc.

IMHO allowing your local bank to offer mutual funds wasn't a bad thing in a sense of one stop shopping. The banks then afraid of lawsuits via Sarbanes Oxley over-reaching causing these banks to cut back on the funds offered, offering no asset allocation and pushing annunites to cover their @$$es instead, did us no good.

Once again, Gov't possibilty deregulating to line Rubin's buddies pockets and then them over-reaching with Sarb-OX. What a mess.....

10 posted on 02/17/2010 6:16:55 PM PST by taildragger (Palin/Mulally 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

for later.


11 posted on 02/17/2010 6:18:24 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Nothing new here... We've discussed this on FR for quite a spell now. Clinton's "It's all about sex" excuse for all of this is absurd!

I still hold Ken Starr responsible for not going beyond his final report in all things Klinton, and not prosecuting that bastard for Treason, and malfeasance! Not to mention prosecuting that venal beotch wife of his!

12 posted on 02/17/2010 6:19:00 PM PST by JDoutrider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith; parsifal
"I’m glad you picked a reputable source for your claim."

The bill (signed into law) was either called the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, or it wasn't. It seems that the source he used to illustrate that is more than a little irrelevant. Gramm is at least somewhate culpable because Gramm was one of the principle architects of the legislation. There's nothing insidious or or liberal about the truth.

13 posted on 02/17/2010 6:21:33 PM PST by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

That was Gramm’s baby. And I’m not really convinced it was anything more than just a little more fuel to a major fire. Gramm amde a good point that the banks hit hardest were least affected by his legislation.


14 posted on 02/17/2010 6:23:28 PM PST by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Like most of the stuff on PBS, this is a pretty bogus account. Glass-Steagall was arcane, useless, and placed our financial organizations at a disadvantage with international firms that had no such restriction.

It seems to me to be an effort to misdirect blame on “de-regulation” rather than where it belongs - regulation.

The reason that derivatives of high risk mortgage backed investments existed was because lenders that were “regulated” into making high risk loans sought ways to spread the risk into packaged securities.

Fannie and Freddie effectively laundered the derivatives by buying them and re-selling them as US GOVT SECURITIES with the implied backing of the US Federal Government. These Fannie and Freddie securities were NEVER off limits for consumer bank investment, and in fact were encouraged by the Fed rules which allowed them to be held as a “cash equivalent” when determining liquidity qualifications.

Citing the repeal of Glass-Steagall as a major factor in the financial meltdown is a smoke screen, and trying to tag Bill Clinton with it is just a way to sound “non-partisan” while pushing for higher regulation and further intrusion into the private sector.


15 posted on 02/17/2010 6:28:36 PM PST by crescen7 (game on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

We’re not big on accountability when things go wrong around here.


16 posted on 02/17/2010 6:29:08 PM PST by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Let’s just get to the point. Marxists want total state power not because it’s good or because it works, but because the idea of government domination seems to fulfill something inside them that they have no clue about.

Being a leftist is kind of like being valedictorian of a school for students with mediocre intelligence.


17 posted on 02/17/2010 6:29:40 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Well if that bothers you, you’ll really get irritated about this Democrat who warned us:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2nZbo8SKbg

And like it or not—Gramm and Leach and Bliley were all......
drumroll......REPUBLICANS!

The reality is the GOP is as much and probably more IMHO to blame for all the deregulation. You know all that “let’s get government out of this and let the free market run itself” stuff.

Conservatives should be all about common sense, and the innate pessimism that human nature don’t change all that much. Big Business screwed the people in the 1800’s, the early 1900’s and they’ll do it again. They are doing it now while the GOP types are sitting around the pickle jar and cracker barrel and blaming the CRA and Barney Franks.

parsy, who has been telling you so for years


18 posted on 02/17/2010 6:33:57 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

When the posting pattern over time screams “I’m a leftist trying to cover for all the crimes committed by Democrats while hoping to pin them on Republicans,” I don’t give much consideration to the content of the post.

The pattern establishes fact, not the individual post.


19 posted on 02/17/2010 6:33:58 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Hoplite

I know and it scares me. I do not think we can rely on the liberals to make the right choices and the conservatives have gotten so deep in bed with the libertarians that most of them have become economic illiterates. Makes me want to go dig up Ayn Rand and stick my size 13 boot right up her....oh never mind.

parsy, the disgusted


20 posted on 02/17/2010 6:37:32 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

Wrong.

The Marxists are the first to court big corporations. Look at Obama. The list is endless.

I’m not particularly interested in defending individual Republicans here. I will defend conservative principles however, even though their justification is self-evident.

If any Republican becomes corrupted by power, they are violating conservative values. They defile themselves, not their former conservative beliefs.


21 posted on 02/17/2010 6:40:13 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

there is enough blame to go around...

Glass-Steagall needs to be un-repealed


22 posted on 02/17/2010 6:41:22 PM PST by element92
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crescen7
"international firms that had no such restriction."

How are those international firms that had no such restrictions doing now? Just saying. It wasn't just a potential collapse because of US banks, but it was the global banking industry in crisis. How many billions of American taxpayer money (borrowed from China) went to foreign banks when the Fed bailed out AIG - perhaps hundreds of billions?

Glass Steagall may have needed some updating, and it's silly to argue that is solely or centrally responsible for our current condition. But, it's also a stretch to assert that it doesn't bear some responsibility for the mess we're in.

It's tough to be the CEO of a bank that doesn't get into riskier lending, and still pay yourself $30-50 million in bonus and salary. Borrowing at 3% and lending at 5% doesn't pay that well. The repeal of Glass-Steagall didn't strengthen America's banks, nor did it help bank shareholders - it just lined the pockets of some very well-educated Wall streeters.

There's a case to be made that private equity firms - firms that don't borrow from the government, nor have their depositor's accounts insured by the FDIC - should be virtually free of regulation. But banks, that feed frequently at the trough of government largess need to have some robust adult supervision.

23 posted on 02/17/2010 6:42:06 PM PST by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Well maybe if you would quit trying to dodge reality all the time, I wouldn’t have to keep pointing out where the GOP is screwing up, and lo and behold, if you make a better Republican, you might end up with a better party.

No political party is perfect and the first duty of any adherent is to try to make his or her party the best. And to correct errors. And to learn lessons.

parsy, who says “Grasshopper, you are chirping so hard you can not hear the frog sneaking up behind you!”


24 posted on 02/17/2010 6:42:33 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
"Being a leftist is kind of like being valedictorian of a school for students with mediocre intelligence."

If you have something of substance to add to the debate about the repeal of Glass-Steagall, let's hear it. But, when you scream "Marxist" and socialist on every thread as well as lob ad hominems, it gets tiring.

25 posted on 02/17/2010 6:46:38 PM PST by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

If you ever figure out just how your thought are completely inverted from truth, you’re likely to become conservative.

Here’s a start: One, the good party is defined by principle. Two, each individual is responsible for their own behavior. Nobody can “make” a better Republican except that individual.

(parsy, who wastes his time warning the heron to watch out for frogs)


26 posted on 02/17/2010 6:52:41 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

it has to be George Bush’s fault, somehow he must have been involved


27 posted on 02/17/2010 6:53:49 PM PST by PMAS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crescen7
Citing the repeal of Glass-Steagall as a major factor in the financial meltdown is a smoke screen, and trying to tag Bill Clinton with it is just a way to sound “non-partisan” while pushing for higher regulation and further intrusion into the private sector.

I agree with you. The Bank of International Settlements capital guidelines allowed banks to double the leverage on residential mortgage loans, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were holding or guaranteeing over half of the mortgages in the nation, including much of the sub-prime ones.

It was a bubble of private greed enabled by government patronage. Congress deserves most of the blame along with the Federal Reserve which made borrowing so cheap.
28 posted on 02/17/2010 6:58:53 PM PST by kenavi (No legislation longer than the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

They like to blame Phil Gramm (Republican) for that one......

In fact Republicans put it through Congress
In both the Senate and House it was Republican majorities that put it through. Most Democrats voted no.

Bill Clinton (Democrat) signed it
Bob Rubin (Democrat) pushed it hard and he was Secretary of Treasury
Larry Summers (Democrat) was also there pushing this crap


29 posted on 02/17/2010 7:00:41 PM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PMAS
"it has to be George Bush’s fault, somehow he must have been involved"

If we had an honest media - and that's a big "if" - it would be clear to everyone that George Bush had nothing to do with the financial meltdown. Every regulatory policy that led to the collapse was in place well before Bush came to office. In fact, if Bush would have been successful in his 2003-2004 attempt at corralling Fannie/Freddie, he may have in fact lessened the US exposure in this mess. Of course, the Dems played perfect defense for Fannie/Freddie eliminating any chance of averting the catastrophe.

30 posted on 02/17/2010 7:02:24 PM PST by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Your take is correct. Please see post #29 for more of my view


31 posted on 02/17/2010 7:03:08 PM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

you are correct parsy.
Republicans by the bucketful voted the Glass-Steagal repeal through Congress. Most Democrats voted nay


32 posted on 02/17/2010 7:06:26 PM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Sure.

Sounds like it comes down to the Democrat “affordable housing” scam, in which the leftists used a coward-piven type strategy to initiate their hoped-for downfall of the United States.

Clinton allowed investment banks to invest in derivatives, which were essentially high risk gambles with no chance of winning. For Clinton (Hillary’s college-era mentor was Saul Alinsky; Obama was instructed by Piven) and others involved in the scam, the almost certain outcome was eventual economic crisis. Oh what a coincidence—just what the leftists wanted more than anything else!

The problem with piven and coward is they define themselves, as do all leftists acting by their rulebook, as liars and thieves. This is unchangeable, no matter how much it hurts if you’re a leftist.

Trying to advance the leftist agenda without disguising it is like trying to sell a truckload of manure to a gourmet cupcake shop running short on cocoa.


33 posted on 02/17/2010 7:08:22 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

I am glad to hear that the GOP will be henceforth excommunicating Messrs. Gramm, Leach, and Bliley. Perhaps the Libertarians or the Know-Nothings will have them.

parsy


34 posted on 02/17/2010 7:08:26 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

You really think tea party folks are the heirs to Socrates?

In a way, you might have something there.

(parsy, who forgets about the trap I mentioned long ago)


35 posted on 02/17/2010 7:13:31 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: whitedog57

I can’t remember how to spell gorelick.

She was at the center of 2 fiasco’s... 9/11 and Fannie.

Between raines and gorelick..they looted about 160million.


36 posted on 02/17/2010 7:15:16 PM PST by TASMANIANRED (Liberals are educated above their level of intelligence.. Thanks Sr. Angelica)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

It was a bipartisan stupid act, and Gramm has to shoulder a good share of the blame, I’m afraid. What was he thinking?


37 posted on 02/17/2010 7:18:15 PM PST by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

And then Obama has to go and get Larry Somers and Rubin to be his economic advisers. And Rahm as chief of staff. Out of all the Dems he could have picked, its the Wall Street groupies.

parsy, who is beginning to think we just can’t win


38 posted on 02/17/2010 7:20:08 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Members of the GOP were involved.


39 posted on 02/17/2010 7:22:17 PM PST by bmwcyle (Free the Navy Seals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

parsy who should be checking out tag-lines.....

Mine is — “It all comes ‘round again”


40 posted on 02/17/2010 7:24:44 PM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: parsifal

“The congressional vote on Gramm-Leach-Bliley in November 1999 was not close. The bill passed handily with bipartisan support in both the House of Representatives and Senate, 450-64 between the two chambers. President Bill Clinton supported the legislation and readily signed it. “

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/money-and-votes-aligned-in-con.html


41 posted on 02/17/2010 7:29:03 PM PST by Lurkina.n.Learnin (Waste and fraud are synonymous with gov't spending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: parsifal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Vote_1999.png

It pretty much looks like a bipartisan cluster-funk to me, that not enough people tried to see what the unintended consequences might be.

Smokingfrog, who starts to get a headache trying to figure out who's trying to screw us the most.

42 posted on 02/17/2010 7:29:36 PM PST by smokingfrog (You can't ignore your boss and expect to keep your job... www.filipthishouse2010.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

In the context of today’s economic realities, you’ve got to be willing to look at the patterns over time.

Republicans in congress can often be blamed for cronyism, and for corruption driven by greed.

But none of them cut their teeth with hard core Marxist subversives. All prominent Democrats have these associations.

So if we’re faced with cleaning house, do we sweep the floor and dust off the shelves or do we start by cutting off the stream of raw sewage seeping in from the basement?


43 posted on 02/17/2010 7:31:07 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Bipartisan for sure but I would lay blame more on Republicans because Congress is supposed to be will of the people and Republicans overwhelmingly voted it through Congress while Democrats voted against it ———>>>>

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. The bills were passed by a Republican majority, basically following party lines by a 54–44 vote in the Senate[12] and by a bi-partisan 343–86 vote in the House of Representatives.[13] After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90–8 (one not voting) and in the House: 362–57 (15 not voting). The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.[14]


44 posted on 02/17/2010 7:33:59 PM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

I vote Republican 95% of time.


45 posted on 02/17/2010 7:35:50 PM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: All

You hit the nail on the head! Clinton’s repeal allowed Banks to invade markets they had no understanding of, the result was derivatives insured by under capitalized agencies, all overlooked by regulators, in the name of profit!


46 posted on 02/17/2010 7:36:23 PM PST by swamprebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Oh it was. Just like the Bankruptcy Reform Bill. But whenever the crux is related to “de-regulation”, I think that is more GOP. It’s one of their bugaboos. So it’s maybe 51-49 against the GOP. A pox on both parties. This is a place for common ground by the grass roots people of both parties. Whatever, the GOP don’t need to go around acting all smug and innocent and trying to pin it on the Dems and vice versa.

parsy, who notes Karl Denninger had a real good post about this when he had to spank Ann Coulter the other day


47 posted on 02/17/2010 7:37:29 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“The finance, insurance and real estate sector contributed more than $86 million to members of Congress between 1997 and the key vote on Gramm-Leach-Bliley in November 1999. As the graph below shows, on average, those lawmakers voting “yea” received about $180,000 in campaign contributions from individuals and PACs in the financial sector during that period. Those who voted “nay” received about $90,000 each, or half of what supporters got.

There was little difference in the money collected by Republicans who supported the bill and those who opposed it; the 255 GOP supporters collected an average of $179,175, while the opponents in their ranks-and there were only five of them-collected $171,890. On the Democratic side, however, there was a wide gulf, as the graph indicates. The 195 Democrats who supported the Financial Services Modernization Act had received an average of $179,920 in the two years and 10 months leading up to its passage, while the 59 Democrats who opposed it received just $83,475.

Many of the Democrats who voted for Gramm-Leach-Bliley are still in Congress, as are many of the Republicans. Republican presidential nominee John McCain was recorded as absent for the 1999 vote. Democratic nominee Barack Obama was not serving in the Senate then, but his running mate, Joe Biden, supported the bill. McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, at the time.

For Gramm-Leach-Bliley’s Democratic supporters, at least, the contributions from that time suggest they were cozier with the financial sector than the bill’s opponents and, thus, more inclined to vote for a piece of legislation that — at least until Wall Street’s recent collapse — greatly benefited their contributors.”

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/money-and-votes-aligned-in-con.html


48 posted on 02/17/2010 7:39:57 PM PST by Lurkina.n.Learnin (Waste and fraud are synonymous with gov't spending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Happy for you.

Hope you got my point about where that horrible smell is coming from.


49 posted on 02/17/2010 7:43:17 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. If what you are doing is worth anything, it should be worth saying out loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Here is a real good site for all the major players (of both parties) and sequence of events. The footnotes and internal links are great, too.

http://www.crashopedia.com/index.php/Main_Page

parsy


50 posted on 02/17/2010 7:45:32 PM PST by parsifal (Abatis: Rubbish in front of a fort, to prevent the rubbish outside from molesting the rubbish inside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson