Archive for June 1st, 2011
Glass-Steagall: Where Are The Tea Partiers And Republicans?
Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD6]
John Conyers [D-MI14]
Danny Davis [D-IL7]
Marcia Fudge [D-OH11]
Jesse Jackson [D-IL2]
Walter Jones [R-NC3]
James McDermott [D-WA7]
James Moran [D-VA8]
Kurt Schrader [D-OR5]
Louise Slaughter [D-NY28]
Edolphus Towns [D-NY10]
Maxine Waters [D-CA35]
Lynn Woolsey [D-CA6]
Where’s Ron Paul in this list? Bachmann? Anyone with an “R” after their name?
What does this bill do? Put Glass-Steagall back in force. That’s all. The text is refreshingly short and not difficult to understand at all.
To repeal certain provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and revive the separation between commercial banking and the securities business, in the manner provided in the Banking Act of 1933, the so-called “Glass-Steagall Act”, and for other purposes.
The text begins with:
(a) Wall Between Commercial Banks and Securities Activities Reestablished- Section 18 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1828), as amended by section 615(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
You keep hearing about how the “Tea Party” is about fiscal responsibility and capitalism. Well, if so, where’s their support of this? Why isn’t this bill on the floor right now, being debated and passed with broad, near-unanimous bipartisan support?
I’ll tell you why: You are being conned America – AGAIN.
Goldman Sachs: Too Big & Important To Prosecute
And apparently, poses too much of a threat to the world’s economy.
From Bloomberg:
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. won’t face criminal prosecution related to sales of mortgage-linked securities because such a move could threaten the U.S. financial system, according to Brad Hintz, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co.
The U.S. Department of Justice, which is reviewing a Senate subcommittee report that alleged Goldman Sachs misled clients before the financial crisis, will avoid jeopardizing the fifth- largest U.S. bank by assets because it’s viewed as “too big to fail,” Hintz wrote in note to clients today.
“If an alleged violation is identified during a Goldman investigation, we expect a reasoned response from the Justice Department,” Hintz wrote. “In a worst case environment, we would expect a ‘too big to fail’ bank such as Goldman to be offered a deferred-prosecution agreement, pay a significant fine and submit to a federal monitor in lieu of a criminal charge.”
There you have it folks. There isn’t really much to add to that, now is there? There is one set of rules for us and another set of rules for them. It also doesn’t hurt that if you are going to do something bad, make sure it is really, REALLY big and horrifying; preferrably something that could destroy the world. You’ll be immune from prosecution for anything.







