
Republicans have spent the better part of two years distancing themselves from bailouts and hitting Democrats for supporting them. But given a choice between continuing the 2008 bank bailout and regulating Wall Street, several Republicans voted last night (and almost all of them will ultimately vote) to keep the bailout alive.
Last night, in a scramble to save the bill in the wake of Sen. Scott Brown's (R-MA) objections to the conference report, Democrats worked with moderate Republicans to figure out a new way to pay for Wall Street reform. What they came up with was pretty simple: end the TARP legislation (i.e., the much-maligned bank bailout) early. Every Republican negotiator on the conference committee objected, some vociferously.
Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) called it "fraud on the American people."
Not to be outdone, Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) called it "smoke and mirrors."
The dispute is budgetary. Republicans want reclaimed TARP funds to be used to pay down deficits. Democrats don't object, but, with the help of congressional actuaries, figured out a way to save money on the books by ending TARP early. According to CBO, if unspent TARP funds are recalled now, the government would end up with about $11 billion more than they would if they lent the money out and reclaimed it down the line. That $11 billion covers more than half the cost of the financial regulation bill.
Familiarly, Republicans were willing to support an alternative plan, pushed by Gregg, to pay for Wall Street reform with unspent stimulus money. Democrats objected to that.
The Democrats' unwillingness to keep the bailouts going and use stimulus money to regulate the banks does not, however, seemed to be based on a political calculus that they could tar Republicans with the vote. Most Democrats just preferred the original plan: pay for regulating Wall Street by imposing a fee on the big banks that were the main target of the legislation. And unless they're biding their time, Democrats have been entirely mum about last night's vote, the new, TARP-ending provision in the bill and the Republican opposition to it.
But they do now have a new political weapon, if they choose to wield it. Given the choice between ending the bailouts, thereby allowing Wall Street reform to pass, and sustaining TARP in an effort to keep the banks from further regulation, Republicans chose the latter. And soon, most other Republicans will vote down legislation that both imposes stricter rules on Wall Street and lowers the much-loathed TARP legislation into an early grave.
Morbo
June 30, 2010 12:29 PM
Mustn't inconvenience our brilliant financial masters with pesky regulations and the such. In fact, after going into debt to cover their gambling losses, it's us who should tighten our belts.
We need to keep our reserves up, just in case their bets go bad again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
martingauthier
June 30, 2010 12:46 PM
"But they do now have a new political weapon, if they choose to wield it."
They won't.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
June 30, 2010 12:47 PM
TARP actually did what it was supposed to but deserved or no it is still really unpopular. It seems like finally shutting it down should qualify as a populist move. The democrats really can and should use this as much as they can. "Bush started it, we ended it..."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
libdevil
June 30, 2010 12:50 PM
The most audacious one had to be the call to fund it out of the FDIC. Make the banksters' smaller competitors pay to clean up the mess the big boys caused. Yeah.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ADad
June 30, 2010 1:06 PM
It's as if an evil genius sprayed all of the Republicans in Congress with a Stupid-Ray. Damn you evil genius!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
June 30, 2010 1:08 PM
"IF they choose to wield it". Says it all.
At some point, progressives need to ask a few basic questions; such as:
Why does the Democratic Party throw every fight?
Why are there no institutional TV spots run by Democrats during the year, demolishing the long-held and widely-internalized tenets of Reagan conservatism for the actual harm they've caused?
And why does the name "Bush" never pass the lips of the current President of the United States, when Republicans are blaming him for everything from the wars, to the deficit, to the heartbreak of psoriasis?
And to that end, perhaps you should all watch Jon Stewart's ruthless bust of the poor little weeping victim Republicans who don't want Dems "blaming Bush" (linked elsewhere at TPM).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tim
June 30, 2010 9:31 PM in reply to Barry Champlain
I think the time is now to start a "sub party" on the left, like the Tea Party is on the right, but of course, much more responsible and serious and genuine of purpose.
There is in New York state, already something akin to this, in the Working Families party.
I'd like to see a Working Families 'sub-party' start to go national. Become more organized: politically and non politically. It could get involved with helping people out in weathering the economic storm. Lending aid and comfort. People helping people, that sort of thing. Building moral authority from the ground up.
When election times come, the sub party can sponsor their own candidates to run in primary battles. If the ground work is done well, then the sub party candidate becomes the Democratic candidate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SolonBiker
July 1, 2010 2:15 AM in reply to Barry Champlain
Exactly. Why do they throw every fight and why do they pull every punch?
We're now, what, 30 years after Reagan, and the Democratic Party has NEVER taken the full measure of the devastation caused by his ideas, dug the ditch, and kicked modern conservatism into its grave.
I used to go crazy during Obama's election run, in that he never made a broader organizing thesis ... that the conservative movement has failed, and that its continued chokehold on our government could only result in the devastation of the American people. Instead, Obama let the thing play out without connecting the dots, and selling a larger vision of what his presidency and the Democratic Party would strive to accomplish.
Republicans are dead wrong, on almost all the issues. But they play hardball, and they play for keeps. The Democratic Party seems to be trapped in a 1950's era Ivy League Debate Club mentality.
I grow impatient waiting to see the politicians -- OUR guys -- act like they get it. And I wonder if soon we'll see Democrats playing nice with the Tea Party brigade, as they slice and dice the remaining shreds of our democracy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
June 30, 2010 1:21 PM
I hope they use this "weapon" after the bill goes to the full chamber.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
subzer0epsil0n
June 30, 2010 2:31 PM in reply to agio
Sad to say, but the Dems will find a way (once again) to grab the "weapon," point it between their legs and pull the trigger.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aq
June 30, 2010 1:52 PM
I'd like to see them be against it, after they were for it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
June 30, 2010 1:59 PM in reply to aq
Step one: Vote for it.
Step two: Attack it.
Step three: Oppose ending it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
June 30, 2010 7:33 PM in reply to mcc
You pretty much summed it up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FellowAmerican
June 30, 2010 2:25 PM
It is important to retain the banking fee component. I'm glad Dem conferees are pushing this.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bushdidit
June 30, 2010 2:46 PM
What else is new. will the Dems get a spine?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
June 30, 2010 4:30 PM in reply to Bushdidit
They're slowly but surely getting it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
June 30, 2010 4:32 PM
So the Republican talking points are to tie everything to bailouts, and then they defend the fund in which bailouts are distributed. You really can't make this shit up. I never thought that the Republican party could get any worse then what it was when Bush was in office, but they keep setting the bar higher and higher day by day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LocksHouston
June 30, 2010 6:28 PM
Financial regulation will benefit also the State. I will give the state much more tools to investigate and regulate so many wrong doing in the financial industry that almost took us to a complete bankruptcy as a country !! On the other hand, I am afraid that to much power to government!! and as we all know, the State and the Bureaucrats will not let go this kind of power, and the big corporation will find a way around regulation, etcc etcc.
Someone needs to be elected in 2 years, some candidates need to be elected in few months. Just politics, words, no more !
John
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
valgal
July 1, 2010 4:02 AM
"...Democrats worked with moderate Republicans to figure out a new way to pay for Wall Street reform"
I didn't realize there were any moderate republicans still in congress much less existence. Who are they?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dupod
July 1, 2010 9:55 AM
I like the story behind this story, namely the difference between the way the two parties approach issues and how to respond them.
Democrats: Hey! We did some studying and figured this out and have a good idea that will save money!
Republicans: Studying is for sissies! I have this pithy soundbite I just pulled out of my ass! I have no idea if it will work or not, and I don't actually care either way, but it sounds cool, so let's go with my plan instead.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ahumbleopinion
July 1, 2010 10:12 AM in reply to dupod
Helped by the Republican assurance, their base is so fearful and easily led, they will vote for Republican no matter what. All they need to say is, be afraid - "they" are black, brown, gay, or smart. Ooooh, scary.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lono65
July 1, 2010 11:45 AM
Where'd I leave that pitchfork? Anybody got any torches?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?