TPMDC
Why The GOP Suddenly Let Up On Financial Reform
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), and Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL)
Share
Send to a friend!
Within 48 hours, the Republican line on financial regulatory reform went from "filibuster" to "we're very close to a deal." Why the shift? Republicans and Democrats will offer up spin all day, chalking up the progress to their own doggedness, but in the end it comes down to a simple reality. Key Republicans, sincere about passing new rules for Wall Street, but intimidated by the notion of blocking financial regulatory reform, let it be known to their leadership that, at some point, they would side with Democrats to break a filibuster. Maybe not on round one, or even round two. But eventually.
"Folks on our side of the aisle want a bill," Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) told TPMDC and a few other reporters Monday night. "I know that. I just [had a] discussion with some of our leadership on the floor. You know, we want a bill."
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) made it equally clear: if top-level negotiations broke down, she and other members would find a solution. "I think it's important to continue between the two principals on the committee, because that's where it's likely to happen," Snowe told reporters yesterday afternoon. "But if not then we'll take things as they come. We'll take the next step."
This afternoon, entering a Republican caucus meeting, the Republican Deputy Whip John Thune candidly acknowledged that the politics just aren't playing out for the GOP, and that members don't want to take a tough vote against regulating Wall Street.
"I think it's a difference between perception and fact, because the facts are very different than the perception," Thune told TPMDC and two other reporters. "I think the Democrats believe that they can get political advantage by painting the Republicans as protecting Wall Street.... The perception right now is what's driving this."
Republican members and leaders still insist that it was a letter, written by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell that forced Democrats' hand, and opened them up to GOP ideas. But it wasn't the Democrats who eased up. Republicans hard charging rhetoric carried through Monday, three days after McConnell delivered the letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid. By the end of the day Republican unity began to soften. The political charge of the issue preserved the Democrats' leverage, and they continue to insist that they'll force the GOP to take the tough vote if a deal isn't reached.
Today, in the Dirksen cafeteria, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), the Republican point man on financial reform, told TPMDC that a global deal on a bill is well within reach. "We're very close to a deal and there will be a substantial number of Republicans that go along with it," he said.
His optimism was paired with a sign of actual movement on votes: Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) voted with Democrats on the Agriculture committee to advance legislation to regulate derivatives--a package that will be incorporated into the broader reform bill. And it was echoed a few hours later by three other Republicans--Sens. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), and Orrin Hatch (R-UT)--who joined Shelby at a press conference to express optimism that they're on the verge of a deal.
The blink will come as little surprise to Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), the lead negotiator for Democrats, who's been saying for weeks that Republicans privately tell him that they want to get out from under the thumb of GOP leadership.
After all, the conservative base, like the liberal base is united on just one issue.
"The one guaranteed applause line whether you're addressing a tea party or liberal bloggers is making sure never again the American taxpayer will have to bail out Wall Street," Sen. Mark Warner told TPMDC in an interview.
"What the market wants most is predictability and we can come up with a bill that affects the rules of road for 50 years," said Warner (D-VA). "Most folks around here know that 18 months after the meltdown should be enough time to put new rules in place."
"This issue is not philosophical," Corker told TPMDC this afternoon. "It shouldn't be... This is the place where the Senate can function like it's supposed to. Maybe this is a beginning point towards us actually moving away from the dysfunctional place we've been."
Comments (187) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
FreeRider
April 21, 2010 3:23 PM
It happened too because (unlike with HCR) Democrats would let the lies take hold. They went back hard after McConnell's lies about "permanent taxpayer bailouts", kept pushing the fact that he met with Wall Street and was quoting verbatim from the Luntz memo.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
April 21, 2010 3:26 PM in reply to FreeRider
Democrats would let the lies take hold
Assume you mean "Democrats would not let the lies take hold"?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
April 21, 2010 3:47 PM in reply to mcc
Correct. Thanks!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PAvoter
April 21, 2010 3:38 PM
Well, President Obama came out strongly against the Republican lies, and then with the Goldman Sachs action, the Republicans suddenly found their united front was on the wrong side. They pretend to be on the side of Main Street, but found out the message was finally getting out that they weren't.
But I put the credit on Obama, not the Democratic leadership.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
April 21, 2010 3:45 PM in reply to PAvoter
Exactly. Also unlike health care reform, Obama came out swinging and put a LINE IN THE SAND when he said that he would VETO any bill that wasn't strong on derivatives.
The line stuck out that Lincoln's derivatives bill is even tougher then Dodd's derivatives bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mass_murdock
April 21, 2010 3:49 PM in reply to PAvoter
I think the Goldman Sachs thing was well timed, they did cry foul a little bit! The timing was "suspicious" LOL!
How dare the dems force us to vote for reforms! We demand an investigation!
Unless you subscribe to the "shit sandwich" theory, in which case the overlords have already won.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spiffarino
April 21, 2010 5:02 PM in reply to PAvoter
And where was Harry Reid on this? He should have been its champion, yet once again he appears to be a no-show.
As this article correctly points out, financial reform is a winning issue with voters across the political spectrum. Had Reid been its most vocal cheerleader he would have had a chance to pull his nuts out of the fire. Perhaps I'm missing the big picture, but the only thing I can figure is that he really wants to lose.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
April 21, 2010 5:21 PM in reply to Spiffarino
STFU with your uninformed ass. Reid was exactly where he should have been doing precisely what he was supposed to do.
He was all over McConnell's ass about his lies and pushing for him to disclose who he met with on Wall Street. The Dems had a coordinated strategy that they executed very well. You'd know that if your first mission wasn't to criticize.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 6:58 PM in reply to FreeRider
I don't know about you but this is getting pretty old everyday having to school folks on what happened. The just get on one person and ride that horse until it drops. I give you credit. I am weary..
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
April 21, 2010 7:04 PM in reply to chameleon
I'm not really trying to school them because they are willfully ignorant. These firebaggers think it makes them more pure and more liberal to be universally opposed to and critical of anything the Democrats do.
They're worthless.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 7:34 PM in reply to FreeRider
I couldn't agree more....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
April 21, 2010 11:01 PM in reply to chameleon
Where is lousgirl anyway?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 22, 2010 9:36 AM in reply to expat46
Who's Lousgirl?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
April 22, 2010 11:15 AM in reply to chameleon
you
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
morriganinoregon
April 22, 2010 12:27 PM in reply to Indie Pro
busted! :)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spiffarino
May 17, 2010 8:35 PM in reply to FreeRider
You assume what I was trying to do was slam Reid's lack of "liberal cred" when in actuality it was a slam on his lack of bravado.
The Republicans, for all their insanity, at least understand how to use a microphone. Don't speak calmly to your opponent; shove the damn thing down his fucking throat.
However, you might have picked that up if you weren't so busy being a self-righteous, self-satisfied asshole.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
arias
April 21, 2010 7:19 PM in reply to Spiffarino
And where is your brain on this? Reid had been hammering the GOP on this issue since they voted against bringing the issue to the floor to debate.
Firebagger, Concern Troll, or just an idiot? It's hard to tell the difference.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
April 21, 2010 7:52 PM in reply to arias
Particularly hard to tell since this appears to be the only comment this person ever made.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SqueakyRat
April 21, 2010 7:52 PM in reply to arias
Sorry, I must have missed a couple of innings -- what's a "firebagger"?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
magurakurin
April 21, 2010 8:16 PM in reply to SqueakyRat
Reasonable question, but, in fact, if you are asking that, you missed more than just a couple of innings. More like a couple of seasons ;)
Firebagger is combination of Fire Dog Lake(a blog run by Jane Hamsher, who's real claim to fame is being the producers of the film Natural Born Killers) and Teabagger. I'm sure the term teabagger is well known, but you may not have heard of FDL. The FDL website thrust itself to the fore during the heated Health Care Wars by coming out hard against the Dems and Obama. They basically felt the bill didn't go far enough. And while more or less everyone on the left agreed with that contention, the vast majority on the left did not agree with Jane Hamsher and her underlings campaign to "kill the bill" if it didn't include a public option. This scorched earth/all or nothing position led to many heated exchanges.
In particular the DKOS website had many bloody battles as Hamsher was paying people to go over there and post diaries. They had a little network of support by which they would twitter amongst themselves and push the diary to the front page and then work as a gang to try and push their agenda. It got mega ugly over there.
Probably the last straw was when Hamsher announced a "partnership" of sorts with Grover Norquist(drown the Federal Government in the bathtub fame)Hamsher claimed that herself, the teabaggers, and dicks like Norquist shared certain common goals. It was from this moment that the term "firebagger" began to become common on the Intertubes. But it is not one to use over at DKOS, the wounds are still raw there.
yeah, I know, I need to get a life....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 8:26 PM in reply to magurakurin
No it's good you explained it for the people who are knew and don't know. I haven't had one email asking me for her support since I told her no more from me after that stunt she pulled.
Her group has been very very quiet these days since she had her ass handed to her.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dustbunny44
April 22, 2010 12:37 AM in reply to magurakurin
Yes, thanks for that rundown. I haven't dropped in much at FDL since Marcy got her own URL at EmptyWheel, did not know that went down.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
beautifulportland
April 22, 2010 7:30 AM in reply to magurakurin
Thanks for the lowdown on FBers and the DKOS.
One of the best written posts in weeks. You have very impressive writing skills.
If we had more writers like you on the "internets and intertubes" maybe more of "low-informed" voters would vote for Dems instead of for the GOP.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Progressive_in_FLA
April 21, 2010 10:57 PM in reply to Spiffarino
Lord, another Anti-Reid Troll! I guess you'd rather have Tom DeLay back in congress twisting arms and pushing Bush's agenda again?
Reid is wonderful and this country is LUCKY to have him working for us! Go peddle your anti-Reid shit on Foxnoise's website.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spiffarino
May 17, 2010 8:41 PM in reply to Progressive_in_FLA
Not anti-Reid, just anti-pussy.
I would like nothing more than for Harry to wrap his yam sack around Mitch McTurtle's neck until he turned blue. Reid has been far too accommodating compared to the Republicans who held the job before him. I'm sick of nice guy Democrats when there are no comparable Republicans. Bring a gun to the gunfight? No, bring napalm and a nuke. Bury the fuckers. They are ruining the country.
Still, I hope you all enjoyed your little circle-jerk.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Angry McAngus
April 22, 2010 7:58 AM in reply to Spiffarino
Rounding up some chickens?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 6:59 PM in reply to PAvoter
Exactly right. Thanks. And the folks who say there is no leadership from this WH are full of bull doodo.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
April 21, 2010 7:17 PM in reply to chameleon
Round 2 to Obama. BADA BING BADA BAM!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 7:35 PM in reply to Brownbagger
Hello BBB. How are you today. I was missing you...and Lars......
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
April 22, 2010 6:43 AM in reply to chameleon
Hi Chamee. Try to get here when I can. Have to stay focused. Regards.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
April 21, 2010 3:43 PM
I think the guy with the least Grecian Formula in his hair in the photo above won!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spiffarino
April 21, 2010 5:08 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
Bah. Ronald Reagan had a thick, luxurious head of jet black hair well into his 80s. Shelby is only 75 and thus much too young for that to be a dye job.
Black hair deep into senility; just one more amazing thing about Republicans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 7:47 PM in reply to Spiffarino
Also, you need to have you'e eyes checked. Ronald Reagan had auburn hair. I saw him in person twice and his hair was what we call Auburn - not even close to Black.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spiffarino
May 17, 2010 8:43 PM in reply to chameleon
Yes, but really...who gives a fuck about Reagan?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 6:56 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
Definitely a dye job and Ronald Reagan did dye his hair regularly. Nancy made him do it
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PeninsulaMatt
April 21, 2010 3:46 PM
Seems like a wasted opportunity. They Republicans had the filibuster all lined up. The Dems should have forced it over and over and over again. If Corker or Snowe or someone else decided they could go along with it if it had one small change, put in that small change and force a cloture vote again. Let the Repos true (Wall Street) colors show. It would have given many vulnerable Dems a good campaign issue and help put pressure on the vulnerable Repos too.
too much defense, not enough offense.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hunter
April 21, 2010 4:06 PM in reply to PeninsulaMatt
Yes, that would have been fun. But this way we get to actually legislate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bwthemoose
April 21, 2010 4:12 PM in reply to hunter
And we get to take credit for another victory, which will only make the republican leadership appear even more pathetic.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PAvoter
April 21, 2010 4:16 PM in reply to bwthemoose
I hope the victory celebration will be over a strong bill, and not that the Republicans found out the bill really won't accomplish much, and another chance to paint the Democrats as being unable to protect the "common man".
It would be easy for Republicans to support a bill that does nothing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lizskin
April 21, 2010 4:22 PM in reply to PAvoter
Wouldn't it be novel if the GOP suddenly found an interest in actually doing something substantially beneficial for the country they were hired to govern?
Oh, sorry. Off my meds again...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
April 21, 2010 4:42 PM in reply to PeninsulaMatt
Totally agree ... the dems blew their chance to corner the gop.
while they are at it, go after them in campaign reform, court appointment, obstructions, health care, etc. get some momentum. stick it to them.
otherwise, guess who will comes november!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
zonk
April 21, 2010 4:56 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Can you point to a single provision that's been weakened?
You sound like a fairly uninformed malcontent who isn't happy unless you're unhappy....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 5:10 PM in reply to zonk
I think JoeWise is a troll. He seems to know so much about what's going on in congress and the white house. Maybe he should get a job here at TPM.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
April 21, 2010 3:46 PM
Isn't this a breach of contract? I wonder if Goldman and the rest of Mitch's Wall Street johns are going to want their money back now that they've been thrown under the bus by the Goppers?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
izzatxeaux
April 21, 2010 4:08 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
uh nope. do you have any idea as to the level of Wall Street friendly carves outs to be had under the cover of all that groovy bi partisanship ?!?!
this is 1999 and the repeal of Glass-Steagall all over again
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hunter
April 21, 2010 6:57 PM in reply to izzatxeaux
Yes, this new regulation is just like when we removed old regulation. Also, war is peace.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
April 21, 2010 6:05 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Ask Harry Reid if he's cutting checks.
68% of Goldman contributions have been to Dems and the majority of Wall Street dollars have been too.
But no reason to let facts get in the way of your keeping lawyer in your portfolio of fantasies there Steve.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kollund
April 21, 2010 11:35 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Well we just found out the difference between a HIGH PRICED WALL STREET PROSTITUTE and the GOP:
GOP are more expensive and they don't feel obliged to perform the service they were paid to do.
Would Wall Street claim their bribe was not working? Would put them in a criminal case would'nt it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
April 21, 2010 3:48 PM
On the other had a wholly different bill is being introduced to do what this one won't. In short the Republicans were right. This bill doesn't stop "too big to fail".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
April 21, 2010 3:53 PM in reply to shooter242
If "the Republicans were right," then why didn't they (as opposed to *Democratic* senators Sherrod Brown, Sheldon Whitehouse, Ted Kaufman, and Robert Casey, from your article above) suggest these amendments instead of threatening to take their ball and go home?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 7:45 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
DNFTT. Please DNFTT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
zonk
April 21, 2010 4:34 PM in reply to shooter242
Which is obviously why the GOP's opposition is crumbling...
Remind me what concessions the GOP got?
Near as I can tell - the derivative oversight has actually gotten stronger compared to the House version. The liquidation fund - and forcing the banksters to fund it - is still in the bill.
Explain to me exactly what concessions the GOP got.
Better yet, explain to me -- in specific terms -- what concessions the GOP wanted... and no - Luntzian talking points are not policy.
If you can actually provide me with a single, concrete policy provision you object to -- you'll actually be one up on your majority leader... who still doesn't even seem to understand what he and his caucus object to (again, Luntzian talking points are not policy objections).
Must really suck to be a Republican... the old shit ain't working like it used to.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
April 21, 2010 4:50 PM in reply to zonk
Don't be dumb. It's the bailouts he objects to. Don't you understand that this is a bailout bill? It's the bailoutiest bailout bill ever. It's ultra super doubleplus bailouty. And everyone hates bailouts. And clearly, that's what the Republicans have done is gotten the bailouts out of the bill because the Republicans are against bailouts. Even the ones who voted for them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
runfastandwin
April 21, 2010 6:20 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Yeah and don't forget - 9/11!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
April 21, 2010 7:50 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
What the Republicans really object to is forcing the industry to set aside money to bail themselves out if they cause more trouble.
The Republicans want the taxpayers to do the bailout next time just like the taxpayers did under Bush.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 7:46 PM in reply to zonk
DNFTT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
April 21, 2010 9:24 PM in reply to chameleon
Well it was a good answer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:55 PM in reply to hollywood
It was indeed. I am a fan of Zonk. I am just sick of the trolls. Shooter isn't as bad as Barney and Silence and a few others but they are definitely the worst. Notice neither Barney no Silence are around today. They posted in another story but no one paid them any attention and now they are gone, at least today that is.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
April 21, 2010 11:44 PM in reply to chameleon
acriticalthinker is suspiciously absent as well.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
April 22, 2010 12:07 AM in reply to expat46
Maybe somebody just got thoroughly pissed off and drowned those rats.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 22, 2010 9:18 AM in reply to expat46
he was here yesterday on a different story. FreeRider kicked it's ass royally as usual. FreeRider takes no prisoners...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NerdRage
April 22, 2010 2:37 PM in reply to chameleon
its always interesting when Barney shows up and drops a bunch of copy pasta'd talking points in
and then a bunch of people respond to obvious trolling by being serious
which makes Barnet giggle and drop some more talking points
i mean seriosuyl, all you gotta post is "obvious troll is obvious" and move on, then when he comes back and says some crap about how he wins the argument all you have to say is "your argument has no merit" and move on
or better yet just ignore...trust me, i used to troll like crazy, and the easiest thing in the world to do is copy pasta some drivel and then sit back and laugh at the morans who took the bait
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sheerahkahn
April 21, 2010 3:53 PM
"I think it's a difference between perception and fact, because the facts are very different than the perception," Thune told TPMDC and two other reporters. "I think the Democrats believe that they can get political advantage by painting the Republicans as protecting Wall Street.... The perception right now is what's driving this."
Perception, Mr. Thune, is reality...something you, the GOP, have been implementing for the past thirty years in your attempts to screw the country over.
But now, now the Dem's are actually going to call you out to put your intransigent asses on the floor to show how stupid you look blocking a bill that would regulate Wall Street from repeating the past fifteen years of economic rape of the United States.
So yes...when you say "no regulation" you are in fact saying, "we, the GOP, are are 100% in bed with the Wall Street banks."
As I said Mr. Thune, perception is reality.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
April 21, 2010 3:56 PM
You don't need any complex explanations for this. They bailed out for the same reason they bailed out on holding up unemployment insurance benefits: they had an absolute loser of an issue and McConnell was driving them over a cliff.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 5:18 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
Bingo. They must have done some polling of their own to find out even people in their own party want reform.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
April 21, 2010 4:02 PM
I think in addition to what everyone else said above, there was another factor at play: the Luntz memo pointed out the weight of the term "bailout", which McConnell and Co. used about 50 times in their speeches Wednesday through Friday morning. But Dem polling determined that the public disliked "Wall Street" even more. So the Dem mantra over the weekend, aided by the Goldman suit, was the Repubs met with "Wall Street bankers". That proved to be a killer.
Also, the Wash Post yesterday gave a timeline on the law suit business. Seems that the SEC was investigating and negotiating with Goldman since last summer. In the last couple of weeks, Goldman announced they would not settle and the SEC decided it was going to move forward.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
izzatxeaux
April 21, 2010 4:10 PM in reply to George C
not "last summer"
GS received their Wells Notice in 8/08 while Chris Cox was in charge
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
April 21, 2010 6:33 PM in reply to izzatxeaux
Yikes! Well, that just proves there was collusion. Oh, wait . . .
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fbacon2
April 21, 2010 4:10 PM
For everyone looking at tactical explanations for why financial reform is moving better than HCR, I'd suggest getting past messaging, spin, "getting tough" and so on, and remember the strategic incentives and structure of the negotiations are different this time.
The Democratic/progressive/liberal side could let this legislation fail and still find a way to win politically. That wasn't the case for HCR. Once the decision and investments were made in achieving a universal health care bill, passing legislation was the only definition of success. Hence all the leverage to the moderates who were less inclined to pass a bill. Plus, financial regulation benefitted from having most of the legislative sausage making completed while everyone was focused on health care, letting us turn the spotlight to Wall Street when Congress was already in the end game.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
April 21, 2010 4:53 PM in reply to fbacon2
Excellent analysis and excellent points. But then, I've always been a sucker for game theory.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
April 21, 2010 6:06 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Oh, can we add fake-logician to the ever growing list too?
:p
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LFC
April 21, 2010 4:24 PM
"I think it's a difference between perception and fact, because the facts are very different than the perception," Thune told TPMDC and two other reporters. "I think the Democrats believe that they can get political advantage by painting the Republicans as protecting Wall Street.... The perception right now is what's driving this."
So 41 Senators threatened a filibuster behind the talking point of Lyin' Mitch McConnell, the Dems immediately fired up ads saying that the Republicans refused to support the legislation (which is true), and the Repubs caved.
So the only way the Republicans will actually do real work on legislation the Dems put forth is if they think obstruction isn't politically working for them. Way to put the country first ... NOT!
Next stop for Obama, one s***load of recess appointments unless the Republicans show some form of restraint on their constant obstructionism on that front.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Resistance
April 21, 2010 4:25 PM
I beleive President Johnson once said somethinglike this
What looks like chicken shit in the morning, becomes chickem salad by nightfall.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ondioline
April 21, 2010 4:33 PM
Unless I missed it, no one logged in to say what a spineless joke Obama is for not having barged back into his old Senate office and personally written the most crushing piece of financial reform legislation the world has ever known. Which leads me to believe that either some folks lost internet access, some folks are on their meds today, or the lot of ya are ge'in' a weeeeee bi' soft!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mass_murdock
April 21, 2010 4:37 PM
So... the Republicans were right all along. It feels good to finally admit it. I feel different now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
John M
April 21, 2010 5:06 PM in reply to mass_murdock
You mean that it's right that Republicnas are and always were chronic liar, especially Mitch McConnell. I wonder if Sue Lowden would still run for the Senate if Senators were paid with chickens? This is typical Republican insanity, as is Gobbler McConnell.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
April 21, 2010 4:46 PM
folks, the dems blew it again, spineless dems.
they should not compromise with the gop. let the gop filibuster. the longer this goes on, the better it is for the dems.
but the dems are so eager to pass the bill, they gave up the upper hand. old fools!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
zonk
April 21, 2010 4:55 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Ummm...
What exactly have they compromised?
Blanche Lincoln, of all people, actually got stronger derivative regulation in the Agricultural committee's bill than even the House passed.
The liquidation fund hasn't been killed (and frankly, if that's all it took to get past a filibuster, I'd trade it in a heartbeat. I think the derivative regulation and oversight is the key part of this bill).
Even the CFPB is still in the bill.
What important provision have they given away?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
April 21, 2010 5:02 PM in reply to zonk
the dems are winning a battle (finreg) but losing the war (nov election). they have lost much ground in the last year and a half because of gop obstruction/filibuster.
now they have a winning hand and they can actually force the gop to filibuster the bill. all they have to do is to force the gop to come up with their own bill and then attack it.
but dodd and reid are too eager to pass a bill that they resume talk with the gop too soon. they should have waited and forced the gop to come begging and showing their true color.
imho, it's a question of strategy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
zonk
April 21, 2010 5:07 PM in reply to Joe Wise
OK - that's nuts.
There's a problem to be solved. We have a chance to pass a bill that actually does a lot of good to address that problem and we should instead be scoring political points?
I'm left-leaning Democrat because I believe in liberal principles.
I'm proud of being left-leaning Democrat because I believe "we're" the only ones actually interested in solving problems.
I'd much rather be both than the former.
What you're suggesting is that we adopt the same type of rot that infected Republicans - where everything is just about scoring political points... No way in hell I'm interested in that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 5:14 PM in reply to zonk
I;m with you Zonk. Forget JoeWise. He apparently has a hair in his butt and he can't scratch it so it's all the dems' fault even when they are winning.
How do you have a discussion with someone who is so negative? You don't
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
April 21, 2010 7:01 PM in reply to chameleon
i apologize for coming on too strong. i am an obama supporter but i am angry at him and the dems for being gutless and spineless when it comes to the GOP. Sure, the dems are winning on finreg. but if you take a look at the big picture, they are losing. when a solid dem like barbara boxer is running neck-to-neck with an unknown like campbell, who is winning?
whe question is why? sure, you can blame it on the economy, on bush, and on everything else. but imho, the dems have to take some blame for being ineffective, failing to capture political momentum in moments like this. that is why i think they are blowing it.
i can be totally wrong, but until someone can prove otherwise, i stand by what i said.
BTW: for the record, i am an obama supporter and i think he is doing a good job in governance. my complaint has to do with his lack of leadership in standing up to the GOP. it is sad to see the gop holding 100 of his nominees hostage in the senate. what has he done to fight for them? nothing!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 7:44 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Joe there is so much wrong with your post I don't know where to begin. Thanks for being an Obama supporter - so please start acting like one.
I have lived in California for 40+ years. The economy in California is in the tank and plenty of folks are unemployed and have lost their homes so they need someone to blame. IMO Boxer will win handily and the more Obama comes here the better it is for her because HE is insanely popular here. Also, with respect to Tom Campbell, he is very well-known here in California and has an excellent reputation and very very smart. He is not a tea partier. He is also very well connected and well respected. So just because you never heard of him means diddly.
As far as Fiorina, she's dog meat. She won't even get close. She has way too much baggage and when the ads start running to expose her, she will be history.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
April 22, 2010 12:06 AM in reply to Joe Wise
Joe, you say it's a matter of strategy, now that the Republicans have agreed to support this bill you suggest that the Dems should say no we want YOU to produce a bill. How do you think that would play out in the press? I understand your frustration but don't let it cloud your judgement. The Dems scored some points on this one, the story of Dodd goading them on the Senate floor for example.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
April 21, 2010 6:28 PM in reply to zonk
What you're suggesting is that we adopt the same type of rot that infected Republicans - where everything is just about scoring political points... No way in hell I'm interested in that.
Cosign.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
April 21, 2010 8:10 PM in reply to slb
Falling on one's sword in the name of the political purity can get you dis-elected.
The Democrats could do absolutely nothing for Obama's first term and if they managed to block the Republicans from regaining the office of the Presidency would have done the country a great service. So the politics of it all matter greatly.
That said, the absolutely best way to win a campaign is to show what effective governance looks like.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bvd
April 21, 2010 8:28 PM in reply to AJM
"That said, the absolutely best way to win a campaign is to show what effective governance looks like."
Agreed. Just as with the 2008 election we're all living and dying day to day with each crumb of news; meanwhile Obama is looking - no, FOCUSED on - long-range results and knows that at the end of his 4 years he's going to have a tremendous string of accomplishments to campaign on. I trust him more tha I trust any of the lefter-than-thou commentators on this or any board.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:31 PM in reply to bvd
Oh thank you so much for a good post, and right on the money I might add. I also trust him more than all these "lefter than thous" myself. I am pretty sick of them myself. There are still a few of us here with good common sense. I am sick of the day to day jumping on every crumb of news and trying to read something into that isn't . I blame TPM for that because so many of their stories are unsubstantiated. Too many times they have had to walk back stories on the same day, no less.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 5:08 PM in reply to Joe Wise
And how do you know all this? Are you some insider or are you just expressing your own feelings? I am always amazed how much people claim to know about what is and is not happening in DC and the White House.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
zonk
April 21, 2010 5:19 PM in reply to chameleon
It piefighting for the sake of piefighting.
I love a good political scrum as much as the next person, but down this road lies madness...
My problem with conservatives mostly and Republicans specifically is that they've long since stopped having any real coherent policy positions -- they're simply interested in fighting with the "other".
Call it the Fox effect - but the only goal is picking fights, winning fights (where winning isn't so much passing anything significant, it's just bloodying the other guy more), then giving the loser a few more good kicks while s/he's down.
That drives me absolutely nuts.
It's turning governance into nothing more than a soccer match - and not so much for the game itself, but just a match as an excuse to get into a good brawl and crack someone's skull.
If that's what the progressive movement is interested in - count me out.
I recognize politics is a place for sharp elbows - but getting in good shoots was supposed to be a means to end (enacting good policy), not an end unto itself.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
April 21, 2010 6:38 PM in reply to zonk
Zorn,
I understand your point but think about my point, which is political momentum.
the dems (including prez obama) are losing in polls and in public trust because they are perceived as ineffective. and they are. if prez bush were to have a super majority like the dems, he would have eaten his opponent alive. but that is another story.
in the long run, to be effective, you need public support and political momentum. IMHO, the way to do that is to clearly define yourself: we dems support the people and you gop support the banksters. and FinReg is the perfect opportunity to frame this issue.
the gop is folding not because they want what is good for the country. they are afraid of being on the wrong side of the issue and losing momentum.
if we seize the momentum we can pass not only finreg but also a whole host of other legislation.
in short, the name of the game is political momentum.
this is my 2 cents. take it for what it's worth.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Boidster
April 21, 2010 6:55 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Or, you know, actually pass good legislation. That counts as "effective" in my book much more than crafting a message about why we're better than they. Show, don't tell.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
April 21, 2010 7:12 PM in reply to Boidster
perhaps in being angry i am overly critical of the dems. but for the life of me, i can't see why they let a small minority has the better of them at almost every turn.
sure, there are senate rules and procedures and so on. but when do you let a small and dis-spirited dictate what you can do is beyond me. can someone please explain to me what the dems plan to do with the 100+ nominees who are being held hostage by the GOP, short of begging the GOP to play nice? Will prez obama have the guts to nominate a liberal to counteract the wing-nuts on the court, or will he have to play by the gop's rule?
these and other examples are why i think the dems are ineffective.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 8:01 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Maybe you should turn off the boob tube and stop buying into the day in an day out bullshit that you are getting from the MSM. We may have the WH and Congress, but the Media is owned lock stock and barrel by big business who are republicans and are controlling the message.
Take a deep breath. namaste
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hunter
April 21, 2010 7:14 PM in reply to zonk
This is pure bullshit. If you're concerned that the party looks ineffective, the antidote is to pass legislation. Sacrificing good legislation to score political points is not "effective" by any sane definition.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 7:56 PM in reply to zonk
I so agree with you. I am a liberal democrat and progressive in my thinking most of the time but I am also a pragmatist and understand that politics is the art of compromise. If Obama does what progressives want him to do by ramming and shoving everything down people's throats we will definitely lose in 2010 and 2012. If this country were so progressive and left of center, then why is this country so split almost evenly? I think most people want us to lead responsibly but not like bullies like George Bush did. Obama knows this. He's smarter than all of them. I myself feel comfortable that we have intelligent grown ups in the WH who or are trying to effect change - change does not happen overnight but it will happen if we don't stay home on election night and if we.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
April 21, 2010 5:19 PM in reply to Joe Wise
You belong in the Republican party because you care more about politics/political grandstanding than governing and improving the life of Americans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Wise
April 21, 2010 6:21 PM in reply to FreeRider
I am an obama supporter but i am tired of him and the dems being beaten up by the gop.
sure, i am angry at the gop, but i am also angry at the dems. they have the super majority and they let the gop cornered them. unless they regain their momentum, they may lose their majority in november.
when dealing with the gop, you can't just try to "do the right thing" and hope everything will work out. what good does it make when you pass the healthcare law and then lose your majority?
IMHO, you have to be smart because the gop have no conscience. like it or not, the game is power; and power comes from persuading the public. right now, the gop has an upper hand because the dems look spineless and gutless, ineffective. think about it: if you can't beat a minority (with only 41 senators), what good are you!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
April 21, 2010 6:56 PM in reply to Joe Wise
Obama and the Democratic majority have more legislative accomplishments than any president/Congress since LBJ. Yet, you say "they're ineffective." That's because you only understand the brawl and buy into the "whoever wins the news cycle is the most effective."
The Republicans haven't won a single battle, yet Democrats are still fainting at the Republican machine (LOL) and complaining about the Democrats.
If you're an Obama supporter, he doesn't need detractors.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chriss1519
April 21, 2010 10:13 PM in reply to FreeRider
is that a picture of a lapdog?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
April 21, 2010 11:53 PM in reply to chriss1519
It's a picture of your last date . . . and you still couldn't get laid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
April 22, 2010 2:37 AM in reply to Joe Wise
As opposed to what? Not passing Health Care Reform? You think the Democrats even stood a chance of retaining a majority if they had lost that one?
Just for grins, lets go with your assumption that the Democrats will lose their majority in the next cycle (you can start by proving that) The good of passing the healthcare law is that you actually got soemthing good done (and granted, it could be a lot better) that will take a major effort by Republicans to undo. There is NO WAY they will get a 2/3 majority in the next election. So until Obama is no longer President the good is that healthcare law is virtually guaranteed to stand.
Its called winning the War, Joe. And here you're worried about losing battles. The Republicans have been playing that game since 1964, and they've made major advances in their agenda. And if you don't believe enough in your agenda to risk an election to advance it, then you have no business governing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 22, 2010 4:59 AM in reply to Joe Wise
JoeWise:
This seems to be a case where Obama and the Dems counter-punched hard. The media was unwilling to call this a "Wall Street bail out bill." Opposition to the bill wasn't polling well. A few Republicans were having trouble articulating their opposition.
For a variety of reasons, "the party of no" couldn't stop the dam from bursting.
Of course, it's not over till it's over, but the Dems have the upper hand. Obama called McConnell's bullshit. That was a critical turning point.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Elizabeth2
April 22, 2010 7:10 AM in reply to JoeTheMechanic
"Obama called McConnell's bullshit" Good point. And he wasn't the only one doing it, either (tho by far the most effective).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Angry McAngus
April 22, 2010 8:16 AM in reply to Joe Wise
Joe, this is beginning to sound like ... well, for lack of a better word, trolling. If the Financial Reform bill ends up being effective and it passes, then the Dems didn't let 41 Repubs beat the majority.
You're saying, I'm tired of them losing to the minority, when they didn't. If it passes. If it's good.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillMcD
April 22, 2010 12:55 AM in reply to Joe Wise
How, exactly, do they 'force' the GOP to filibuster? How do they force the GOP to call an absence of a quorum, for example? Put a gun to their heads?
If you're talking about political maneuvering intended to provoke a response, that runs the risk of being seen for exactly what it is. Sometimes, it really is better to win gracefully than to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women - especially when you're already occupying the moral high ground. No reason to let them pull you back down into the muck w/them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AS
April 21, 2010 5:45 PM in reply to zonk
...and Blanche also has a fund raiser with Goldman Sachs this week.
Visit: http://www.actblue.com to support Bill Halter.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:46 PM in reply to AS
She cancelled. Nice try at trolling. The story is here at tpm.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:48 PM in reply to AS
Lincoln Cancels Goldman Fundraiser
moments ago
It was canceled. Story right here at tpm under financial wire.
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) canceled a fundraiser she was supposed to have with Goldman Sachs executives this coming Monday. Lincoln has said she won't return campaign contributions from the firm, however.
#
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:50 PM in reply to AS
Lincoln Cancels Goldman Fundraiser
moments ago
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) canceled a fundraiser she was supposed to have with Goldman Sachs executives this coming Monday. Lincoln has said she won't return campaign contributions from the firm, however.
#
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:57 PM in reply to chameleon
Oops. Sorry for the triple posts
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 6:52 PM in reply to Joe Wise
The only fool here is you JoeWise because you don't know what the hell you are talking about and you don't even know what the hell is in the bill because it isn't final.
What a jerk...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kevin Sutton
April 21, 2010 5:30 PM
This result has been a pleasant surprise. I was not expecting the GOP to have to face reality.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Elizabeth2
April 21, 2010 5:49 PM
This may be 'unlike Health Care' in all the ways folks are saying .... but I believe it is because of health care.
The Dems didn't quit - on a confusing, poorly played, not very popular, frightening and seemingly unchangeable issue, they didn't quit -- even after, with Scott Brown's victory it looked like they had definitely lost. Republicans wound up being a meaningless side-show - or at least perceived as such. You just can't tell a group of politicians that their lot is to continue to be a meaningless side-show for the next three, possibly seven years.
"The Constipateds" (McConnell and Boehner - sorry, that's all I can think when I see the two of them) had their chance to convince their obedient ranks that intransigence was a successful tactic ... and they failed. I know there aren't a *lot* of half-way sensible Republicans left in Congress, but I'd sure love to see them become the leaders that other Reps listen to.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
April 21, 2010 6:33 PM in reply to Elizabeth2
Good point; showing the other guy that you aren't afraid of a bloody nose makes him re-calculate attempts to bully you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Shoto
April 21, 2010 5:50 PM
Without the blessing of Simon Johnson, Elizabeth Warren, William Black, and other notables, we can be pretty sure we're being fed a dogshit sandwich. Let them weigh in first.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
April 21, 2010 6:36 PM in reply to Shoto
Well, Simon Johnson evidently got snookered by an industry astro-turf group into supporting what was actually a "kill the bill" effort. Now he's trying to get them to take his picture and endorsement off of their web site.
Krugmann has positive things to say about the bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hunter
April 21, 2010 7:34 PM in reply to Shoto
Thanks for the 35th iteration of this comment. We'll get right on that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Shoto
April 21, 2010 5:52 PM
I am very skeptical about the fact that this thing is now moving so quickly. Something(s) very significant just ain't right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LFC
April 21, 2010 5:58 PM in reply to Shoto
I think things can move through Congress with lightning speed if they perceive that moving slowly doesn't poll well. Self interest trumps governing every time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluebell
April 21, 2010 6:37 PM in reply to Shoto
It's a great victory for Democratic politicians. They've convinced Republicans to embrace pretending to regulate. Pretending polls particularly well.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 8:22 PM in reply to bluebell
You back again with your negativity. You have nothing to add but to agree with people who don't even have a fricking clue.
You just love to complain. The other day it was about not being able to deduct your OTC meds and now you are bitching and complaining about a bill that hasn't even passed and I'll bet you don't have a clue about what is actually in the proposed bill.
Maybe you need to get off some of those meds so you can start thinking clearer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:36 PM in reply to bluebell
How does this work for you
Reuters: CBO Estimates Reform Bill Would Reduce Deficit By $21 Billion
1 hour ago
Reuters is reporting that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the financial reform bill will reduce the deficit by $21 billion over the next 10 years, due largely to the liquidation fund banks would have to pay into.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
April 21, 2010 6:06 PM
Time for all Republicans who LOVE to hate on the deficit to give props where they're due -- or to explain why this is a bad idea.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
April 21, 2010 6:13 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
According to CBO:
So let's be clear:
The bill adds taxes of $75 billion, and the bill adds new spending of $44 billion.
I don't think anyone ever said Democrats weren't really, really good at taxing and spending...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
April 21, 2010 6:39 PM in reply to truth > spin
Works better than the Republican strategy of decreasing taxes and adding new spending. At least in this case, the spread works to reduce the deficit, not increase it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 6:53 PM in reply to truth > spin
At least we spend it where it does some good, rather than in the pockets of the rich and powerful.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
April 21, 2010 8:33 PM in reply to chameleon
That's a totally different argument. It's entirely valid, but different.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Boidster
April 21, 2010 7:00 PM in reply to truth > spin
FSM forbid we keep reducing the deficit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
April 21, 2010 8:40 PM in reply to Boidster
I am all for reducing the deficit. But we can't keep doing it with new spending that also happens to include new taxes in excess of the new spending.
Too many people equated the deficit being reduced by the HCR bill as meaning that we were going to spending less. In fact I think that impression was deliberately fostered, so I feel like I should point it out whenever it's tried again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
April 21, 2010 9:19 PM in reply to truth > spin
Why not? The industry that will pay the tax is making record profits, and they clearly need to be regulated. Why is it not equitable to expect that an industry that demands that it be bailed out bear the cost of making sure that bailouts don't happen again?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Angry McAngus
April 22, 2010 8:22 AM in reply to Dave Adams
+1
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:35 PM in reply to truth > spin
How does this work for ya truthey
Reuters: CBO Estimates Reform Bill Would Reduce Deficit By $21 Billion
1 hour ago
Reuters is reporting that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the financial reform bill will reduce the deficit by $21 billion over the next 10 years, due largely to the liquidation fund banks would have to pay into.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
April 21, 2010 9:11 PM in reply to truth > spin
Let's be even clearer: The taxes are to be imposed on an industry that's already came to the public trough demanding a bailout to the tune of $700B. You think we can afford that again?
If it prevents another bailout, it's cost-effective. I don't think anyone ever credibly say Democrats weren't really, really good at saving the taxpayer money on bailouts.
Compared to the Bush Administration solution, this is a bargain.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LFC
April 22, 2010 10:12 AM in reply to truth > spin
So you expect effective regulation and oversight of a multi-trillion dollar industry without spending any money?
You sound suspiciously like a Tea Partier ... wanting something for nothing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
April 22, 2010 4:47 PM in reply to LFC
No, that is not what I am saying at all. And I am not even saying that this isn't a bill worth supporting. From the slim details I do know, I'd say it likely is better than the status quo - or at least not a bad start.
My point is that every solution can't be adding more spending and even more taxes, even if there are more new taxes than new spending.
It's not that they are not good ideas or worthy causes, but at some point it has to be enough. And the new taxes we reach for today are taxes that won't be there for the taking in order to come to grips with the severe shortfall we are creating in out year obligations.
It would be better to pass the tax side of this bill (and the HCR bill too) and not do the spending. So in fact, I am exactly the reverse of what you said - I want NOTHING and I am suggesting that we all still pay SOMETHING.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SW
April 21, 2010 6:44 PM
This needs to be the best bill that can possibly be written with no regard for Republican sensibilities because they have completely tipped their hand at this point. Dare them to oppose it. Because the issue, would be more valuable going into the midterms than the bill. This is not an exaggeration because the entire progressive agenda depends upon the ability to short circuit the cynical attempt of the Republicans to coopt the populist rage that is out there and justifiable regarding the banks and Wall Streets behavior and direct it at the Administration and the Democrats because of the stimulous bill. This is our opportunity to drive a stake through the heart of that strategy and the Republicans know this. This is why they are caving. Because they recognize that if they don't neutralize this as soon as possible they will lose their ace. We will always be able to pass this bill for same reason that the Republicans are on board right now. Now is the time to up the ante until it gets so high these guys will fold. To do anything less is political malpractice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Redshift
April 21, 2010 7:06 PM
And there the true Republican position is revealed -- they don't want to be seen as being for Wall Street over Main Street ("tough vote"), but if they weren't actually for Wall Street over Main Street, it wouldn't even be an issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:51 PM in reply to Redshift
Bingo!!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
boo_lala
April 21, 2010 7:07 PM
I think one reason the Republicans caved so quickly is that their opposition wasn't really driven by Wall Street lobbyists as much as it was pure politics. The politics were "oppose everything Obama" and it wasn't working out for them. In fact, their opposition to this made their opposition to HCR look less prinicipled and more craven.
Sure, the banks would rather have less regulation, but on the other hand they do realize that they were very close to all going down with the ship and without regulation, it will happen again. They care that they all play by the same rules, but I don't know that the financial industry is really lobbying hard for the thing that almost wiped them out to go unchecked and unregulated. And with a tough bill, the populist anger against them might die down enough so that they can go back to lining their golden parachutes in peace.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
April 21, 2010 9:21 PM in reply to boo_lala
I think it has more to do with risking an uprising by the Teabaggers than anything else.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 10:07 PM in reply to Dave Adams
Very good point, but then again who knows what the tea partiers really care about. When polled they overwhelmingly voted for Bush and still like him yet he did more damage to the country with his spending and paying for nothing, let alone the wars, the economy, 20 million jobs lost, so who knows if they would really be angry with the thugs if they didn't vote for financial reform. I'm not so sure they would. It isn't as though they have any cred. They gave Scott Brown a pass for voting for the jobs bill and gave him a pass. They are not principled people, they are racists.
I don't buy any of "real" tea party anger over the economy or wall street, these people don't like Obama because he's black and smart and they don't want a black man running their country. The guns rights folks are demonstrating in a government National Park over taking their guns away yet it was in a National Park that they were carrying their guns. Obama hasn't taken anything away from them yet they are still demonstrating which solidifies my belief that it is all about race.
It defies logic
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 10:11 PM in reply to chameleon
Sorry for all the errors, I really should proofread.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
April 21, 2010 11:54 PM in reply to chameleon
I been following your comments all day while I've been keeping tabs on the Barbie triplets:Sarah, 'Shelley and Sue. I new there was a good reason why I hitched my wagon to your star. And I thank you for all that you have said here. Since I can't match your wit I'll just smile, stand aside and say, "Yeah I'm with her and that goes double for me." I think I am actually following some very smart and dedicated people along with you chameleon. I'm in that place that you were in last week where you just think that your head is going to explode from the sheer luncy out there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 22, 2010 9:16 AM in reply to larsvanness
I am so glad to see you- you are sorely missed. Is everything okay on your end? A glimpse of the Pres' speech is here at TPM this morning and already the naysayers are hot and heavy with their negativism. It blows my mind too and makes my head feel like it's going to explode. I hope you come back soon or just watch if you prefer, just keep in touch and let me know you are there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Thomas Fisher
April 21, 2010 7:09 PM
Legitimate business interests and multinational corporations, at least the ones who provide actual materials and services instead of "financial instruments," are all for reform. Corporations got pounded as a result of the derivatives-driven meltdown; many people lost jobs, lost market share, lost share price, destroyed long-term plans, and many still haven't recovered.
This is one situation where Republicans decided big general business is more important than only big financial business.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Partisancheese
April 21, 2010 7:12 PM
Would it be too wide-eyed and innocent to hope that maybe the Republican's change of heart would lead to a more effective bill? . . . Yeah, thought so.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jfields
April 21, 2010 7:48 PM
Every single Frank Luntz memo from here on out needs to be printed here, announced by the White House and Dem leaders, and published daily, side-by-side, with the (identical, of course) quotes from GOP leaders that inevitably follow a Luntz memo.
Go nuclear on Luntz. Reveal the lies. Reveal the technique. Ignoring him has been tried.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
witty1
April 21, 2010 8:09 PM in reply to jfields
I concur.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 8:23 PM in reply to jfields
Now that I can agree with 100%.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jthomas666
April 21, 2010 7:49 PM
It occurs to me that appearing reasonable on this issue saves political capital that they can save for Obama's SCOTUS nomination.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Truff
April 21, 2010 8:07 PM
Republicans would be better off coming out of the closet en masse than fighting banking regulation reform.
Dems in close races this fall are probably disappointed to see this Rep change of heart. Rep filibuster of this could have cost them any "too close to call" seats they were hoping to pick up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bvd
April 21, 2010 8:35 PM in reply to Truff
While I'm sure the Dems would have loved to point to GOP protection of their pals on Wall Street, the fact is this baby will be over soon with the Dems winning on a major piece of legislation. By ending it quickly they can move on to the next battle. This will save a lot of potentially wasted time. If the ems play their cards right they can be perceived as being "on a roll." Success is the politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bvd
April 21, 2010 8:43 PM in reply to bvd
Meant to say success is the BEST politics. So solly.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chard
April 21, 2010 8:36 PM in reply to Truff
You're right. I think some of the GOPers, or staffers, remembered the old adage, "When the other guy is killing himself, sit back and enjoy it"
Then it occurred to them: "Hey! That's US!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
April 21, 2010 9:16 PM
Corralling cats is tough by any measure, but when your wrangler is Mitch McConnell…
…Who said grazing isn’t good for the soul?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dutch
April 21, 2010 9:18 PM
The Republicans KNOW they need to support this.
My advice to the Dems: Be as strong, forceful, progressive, stringent on these regulations as you can be.
THe Republicans KNOW they'll have to sign on.
Don't give in to their demands.
Be strong. Be the Democratic Party, the ones we elected.
LISTEN TO PEOPLE LIKE PAUL KRUGMAN AND ELIZABETH WARREN.
They really ARE experts and they seem to be the only ones to care about the 'regular folks', your constituents.
Forget about Geithner and Summers. After all is said and done, they may very well be under SEC investigation, criminal or otherwise.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RocketEngineer
April 21, 2010 11:25 PM in reply to Dutch
Make the bill so strong that they have to filibuster it, then hang them in the fall.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
spytheweb
April 21, 2010 9:53 PM
Because republicans have to put their names on this and when they run for reelection this can be used against them as siding with wall street and big banks against the people, and they would be right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 21, 2010 9:58 PM in reply to spytheweb
Yep and you can believe they probably cared more about the political ramifications!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ThirdHeat
April 21, 2010 11:30 PM
Yay! Does these mean we get a toothless watered down bill catering to the needs of financial institutions that will have no impact all in the name of bipartisanship?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
April 22, 2010 2:29 AM in reply to ThirdHeat
No.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dbl.r7711
April 22, 2010 12:29 AM
Those damned rethuglicans are just covering their own asses. Old weak chinned Mitch McConnell just went too far this time with his bullcrap. ( he`s either with the public or wall street ) He realizes that Frank Luntz does not have to worry about having to be re-elected, he and others do at some point. We will be hearing a lot less "No" and more "can we all just get along" ?... lol...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
msirt
April 22, 2010 3:07 AM
""I think the Democrats believe that they can get political advantage by painting the Republicans as protecting Wall Street.... The perception right now is what's driving this."
Finally Dems are catching on to what Repubs have been doing for years. The tables are turning. It's about time!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 22, 2010 5:15 AM
I fully expected that Joe Lieberman would hold a press conference to express how much he is agonizing. (Dems tied him up with electrical cord and locked him in a closet.) I thought Blance Lincoln would denounce this big government bail out of Wall Street. (James Carville slipped some LSD in her oatmeal.) I assumed Max Baucas would hold out for more campaign donations. (Dems bribed him with swiss bank accounts.) Seems that somebody prevented Rahm from screwing this one up.
Congradulations to whoever has been cracking the whip. Maybe Axlerod and Ploufe are getting a bit more respect these days.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SqueakyRat
April 22, 2010 7:11 AM
So, what, no fuckin zitti?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 22, 2010 8:34 AM in reply to SqueakyRat
That's right Squeaker, you get no fuckin ziti.
You lost.
Keep trying!
hehehehe LOL
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
osage
April 22, 2010 10:16 AM
TODAY’S REPUBLICANS ARE AMERICA'S ENEMY WITHIN
Republicans ARE practicing seditious DEMAGOGUERY and anti-democracy OBSTRUCTIONISM intended to destabilize our economy for purposes of political exploitation.
Republicans AREN'T making a sincere effort to STOP the bleeding THEIR incompetent leadership and failed policies created. Instead, they're using inflammatory lies and accusations as a smokescreen to conceal their subversive agenda, which is to cause President Obama and America to fail so they can blame Democrats for the consequences of THEIR calamitous mismanagement.
Republicans ARE preposterously professing that THEIR disgraceful political WHORING had nothing to do with the banking, real estate, stock market and employment catastrophes that resulted.
Republicans ARE trying to hamstring Democrats to prevent them from repairing the damage caused during a Republican presidency that was irresponsibly enabled by Republican Senators and Representatives.
Republicans ARE offering ridiculous arguments meant solely to disrupt and prevent progressive change. They'd rather divide America and create political gridlock than endure the political consequences of effective Democratic governance.
Republicans AREN'T the LOYAL OPPOSITION; they ARE the ENEMY WITHIN whose mercenary priorities have eroded their moral and ethical standards to the point that depravity and betrayal have become their preferred modus operandi.
It's one thing to advocate their conservative beliefs; it's another thing entirely to willfully sabotage America's government because a successful Democratic presidency would not be vulnerable to the greed, fears and hatreds that have produced and sustained the despicable Republican anti-government corporatism and anti-Christian faux theocracies that are poisoning and crippling American society.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Agathena
April 22, 2010 10:43 AM
NO, liberal bloggers are not the counterpart to the insane extremist tea baggers!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mjeffn
April 22, 2010 11:29 AM
Finally Obama's dropped.
Single payer Universal Health Care, anybody?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
manyamile
April 22, 2010 11:44 AM
if it is true, they dropped opposition because
1. they couldn't win it. they have decided to place their chips on other battles.
2. they saw the issue as too complicated and boring for media coverage
and therefore couldn't find a histrionic, emotional hook to gain necessary media traction with their constituents . again, deciding to place heavier bets on other issues, hoping this one will slide under the radar.
3. they are waiting to fan the flames on immigration reform and hoping to keep alive the embers with health care lawsuits, smear campaigns, and empty cries of balance the budget, i.e. they are in full election mode and fighting a boring financial bill doesn't bring in donors or buy valuable sound bites for later viewing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 22, 2010 12:44 PM
The Republican's could suddenly go back into lock-step opposition, claiming Wall Street bail out, government takeover, your granny, or whatever. They will not allow a Democratic victory. Unfortunately, we have cowardly and corrupt Democrats who will gladly assist.
Dems must go forward. Full throttle. Enforce party discipline with whatever it takes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
April 22, 2010 12:49 PM
Team brainfart over at the GOOP. mitch mcconnel, AKA-Auggie Doggie, looked like he was going to poop a peach pit with cornyn sweating all the details right behing him. They switched because a group aneurysm also wasn't good tactical policy.
BTW, whwere's "HELL NO" boener. Is he getting his timeout after taking his turn carrying the torch?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 22, 2010 1:11 PM in reply to Leftflank
Where IS "Hell NO You Can't!" Boehner? I kinda miss his screaming. Maybe he's waiting for final passage of the bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
April 22, 2010 2:00 PM in reply to JoeTheMechanic
It ain't over 'til the bottle-tanned alcoholic screams.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
April 22, 2010 2:02 PM in reply to Leftflank
Oh yeah, I forgot to ask, isn't drunk legislating against the senate rules?
Hell yes it is!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 22, 2010 2:27 PM in reply to Leftflank
I think the Dems have some pretty good leadership. When Obama has had his wheaties, he is 100% power grand slammer, graceful and elegant. Reid has his moments. I really like Dick Durbin. Pat Leahy is pretty good.
On the Repub side...
McConnell can repeat talking points, but can't think on his feet. Boehner is gift to the Democrats. Orin Hatch is probably their best talking head, but his appeal is limited. The Republican strength has been their ability to march in unison with the same message. This time, they couldn't hold the line.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
June 6, 2010 2:24 AM
OK - that's nuts.
There's a problem to be solved. We have a chance to pass a bill that actually does a lot of good to address that problem and we should instead be scoring political points?
I'm left-leaning Democrat because I believe in liberal principles.
I'm proud of being left-leaning Democrat because I believe "we're" the only ones actually interested in solving problems.
I'd much rather be both than the former.
What you're suggesting is that we adopt the same type of rot that infected Republicans - where everything is just about scoring political points... No way in hell I'm interested in that.
m65 kamagra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?