If at first you fail to restore the conditions for a financial crisis, try, try again.

[homersapien 9,742]

Republicans demonstrate they are more interested in the welfare of investment banks than they are of the American people.

After Surprising Defeat, House GOP Vows To Make A Second Run At Relaxing Wall Street Reform

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans, dealt a surprising defeat Wednesday evening in their effort to roll back Wall Street reform, decided Thursday to make another run at relaxing regulations on banks.

Republicans brought the bill, which would delay the so-called Volcker Rule, to the House floor under a suspension of normal rules, which means a bill needs a two-thirds majority in order to pass. Dozens of Democrats who supported the bill last session, however, flipped on it this time, and the bill failed.

"It’s disappointing so many Democrats who voted for these provisions just four months ago suddenly switched their votes in a transparent ploy to appease their far left-wing base," said Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.Rep. Jim Himes, a Democrat from a Connecticut district that is home to many financial industry elites, is a strong backer of the bill. “There were some folks who looked at the same thing this Congress and thought that they felt differently about it,” he observed on CSPAN Thursday morning. “There is a very strong movement out there that any adjustments to Dodd-Frank of any variety is quote unquote gutting Dodd-Frank, that it’s a bad idea.”

Despite the win for Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D-Mass.) wing of the Democratic Party, the House Rules Committee announced Thursday evening that the lower chamber would take another crack at the bill, HR 37. Without two-thirds, however, Republicans will be unable to overcome the veto President Barack Obama promised Wednesday night.

The House Rules Committee will take up the bill Monday night, and it's expected to go to the floor under normal rules.

The willingness to bring the bill back to the floor is a sign Republicans have not been scared off of attempts to chip away at Wall Street reform by the populist mood Himes described.

The bill would allowbanks to hold onto billions of dollars in risky collateralized loan obligations for two additional years by amending the Volcker Rule, which is part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law. The rule bans banks from speculating in securities markets with taxpayer funds, requiring them to dump their CLO holdings. A Volcker Rule delay would be a major boon to the nation's largest banks. Between 94 percent and 96 percent of the domestic CLO market is held by banks with at least $50 billion in assets, according to federal regulators, who value the market at between $80 billion and $105 billion. Of that total, about half is owned by just two banks: JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup.

CLOs are similar to the complex mortgage securities that banks binged on during the housing bubble, only they pool together loads of corporate debt instead of mortgages. After the loans are packaged together, banks slice off pieces for sale to investors. Federal regulators at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency warned banks last month that the corporate debt market is overheating, making complex packages of corporate debt risky business in the current economy.

JPMorgan Chase's most recent quarterly SEC filingsays the bank holds $30.1 billion in CLOs. Citigroup said in its latest quarterly report that it owns $17.6 billion in CLOs.

Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, in an email to HuffPost, mocked the effort to repeal the rule that bears his name.

"It is striking that the world’s leading investment bankers, noted for their cleverness and agility in advising clients on how to restructure companies and even industries however complicated, apparently can’t manage the orderly reorganization of their own activities in more than five years," Volcker said.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), the lead Democrat on the Financial Services Committee, who, along with Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), organized the opposition to the bill, immediately denounced the attempt to bring it back to life.

Ryan Grim

Zach Carter

http://www.huffingto..._n_6439516.html

Edited January 9, 2015 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 3,319]

It is a beautiful business model. Risk, what risk. Profitable, we are capitalists. Cataclysmic losses, we are socialists.

[autigeremt 5,667]

It's not just a GOP issue. A lot of Democrats will smile when they see something like this passed....even if they lie about it.

[homersapien 9,742]

It's not just a GOP issue. A lot of Democrats will smile when they see something like this passed....even if they lie about it.

Sorry, but you really have to stretch to portray this a bipartisan issue.

Fact is, regardless of how any given individual may feel, it's the Democrats who stopped it now and it will be Democrats who will stop it in the future.

But the real point is whether or not this is good for the country's financial system. Republicans apparently think so. Guess they figure to gain more than they lose when the s*** once again hits the fan. Screw the country.

[DKW 86 6,382]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

[homersapien 9,742]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Not to anyone with a sense of proportion.

Edited January 10, 2015 by homersapien

[DKW 86 6,382]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Not to anyone with a sense of proportion.

Politics is a mass participation event. Dealing with the voting public means that there are going to be a lot of people with no sense or proportion voting.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Thanks man, you completely ruined my creepy and probably very inappropriate fantasies dealing with Pocahontas with that. Why don't you take out Cinderella, Snow White, and Ariel while your at it at finish em all off!

[icanthearyou 3,319]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Thanks man, you completely ruined my creepy and probably very inappropriate fantasies dealing with Pocahontas with that. Why don't you take out Cinderella, Snow White, and Ariel while your at it at finish em all off!

Are you still banned from Disney World?

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Thanks man, you completely ruined my creepy and probably very inappropriate fantasies dealing with Pocahontas with that. Why don't you take out Cinderella, Snow White, and Ariel while your at it at finish em all off!

Are you still banned from Disney World?

Ya

[DKW 86 6,382]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Thanks man, you completely ruined my creepy and probably very inappropriate fantasies dealing with Pocahontas with that. Why don't you take out Cinderella, Snow White, and Ariel while your at it at finish em all off!

Thanks, its my job. lol

[homersapien 9,742]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Not to anyone with a sense of proportion.

Politics is a mass participation event. Dealing with the voting public means that there are going to be a lot of people with no sense or proportion voting.

Very true. But in this case, you were talking about yourself, so presumably you're one of them.

Edited January 11, 2015 by homersapien

[DKW 86 6,382]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Not to anyone with a sense of proportion.

Politics is a mass participation event. Dealing with the voting public means that there are going to be a lot of people with no sense or proportion voting.

Very true. But in this case, you were talking about yourself, so presumably your one of them.

homer, there you go again. I never said I couldn't move on with fauxcahontas. I was talking about the general public not being able to look past it.

<smh>

[homersapien 9,742]

This took my breath away. The first thing the idiots do is try and relax the already weak protections against what happened in 2008.

I may be crazy, but i am with fauxcahontas on this one. We need even more stringent laws on this. put back Glass-Stegall and this time with more teeth.

My problem is that fauxcahontas may have permanently damaged her own credibility with the freaky "I am a native American thing."

Not to anyone with a sense of proportion.

Politics is a mass participation event. Dealing with the voting public means that there are going to be a lot of people with no sense or proportion voting.

Very true. But in this case, you were talking about yourself, so presumably your one of them.

homer, there you go again. I never said I couldn't move on with fauxcahontas. I was talking about the general public not being able to look past it.

<smh>

Well you have to admit, the way you expressed it was ambiguous. So don't blame me for misunderstanding.

[DKW 86 6,382]

No, I was speaking about how Warren damaged her credibility with the fauxcahontas episode. She damaged her appeal to the common folks. She has handed any competitors a huge weapon.

[homersapien 9,742]

No, I was speaking about how Warren damaged her credibility with the fauxcahontas episode. She damaged her appeal to the common folks. She has handed any competitors a huge weapon.

My point was the ambiguity of how you stated it: "My problem is that fauxcahontas..." Surely I don't need to explain it?

[DKW 86 6,382]

Warren's credibility with one lone Alabama redneck would not stop anything.

Homer, do yourself a favor and stop over reacting to everything. The term credibility implies that there were many involved.

How would a credibility problem with one man in Alabama stop Warren from winning enough political clout to stop her from fixing the problems with the financial mess?

[homersapien 9,742]

Warren's credibility with one lone Alabama redneck would not stop anything.

Homer, do yourself a favor and stop over reacting to everything. The term credibility implies that there were many involved.

How would a credibility problem with one man in Alabama stop Warren from winning enough political clout to stop her from fixing the problems with the financial mess?

I am not over-reacting. I was simply responding to your post. Like I said, I misunderstood you. But it was ambiguous.

"My problem" sounds exactly like that - your problem. "Fauxchahontas" is a derogatory meme, the use of which implies you agree with it's intent. That's why I inferred you were expressing your own personal feelings.

Now if you said "My concern is that Warren....", you would have clearly made your point.

Let it go.

Edited January 12, 2015 by homersapien

[autigeremt 5,667]

No, I was speaking about how Warren damaged her credibility with the fauxcahontas episode. She damaged her appeal to the common folks. She has handed any competitors a huge weapon.

My point was the ambiguity of how you stated it: "My problem is that fauxcahontas..." Surely I don't need to explain it?

Surely not. She has never been Native American.

[TheBlueVue 177]

No, I was speaking about how Warren damaged her credibility with the fauxcahontas episode. She damaged her appeal to the common folks. She has handed any competitors a huge weapon.

My point was the ambiguity of how you stated it: "My problem is that fauxcahontas..." Surely I don't need to explain it?

Surely not. She has never been Native American.

Nope but she had no problem claiming native american heritage when that law professorship became available at Harvard. It was also well known Harvard was under, at least, some pressure to have minority representation in its law school faculty. She knew that. Its at least somewhat interesting that once she was tenured, she stopped listing her native american heritage on the faculty roster. Seems that's a character problem more than a credibility problem. If she'll lie about her heritage for her enrichment, I'd say its fair to assume she'll lie, much like Obama, whenever its expedient in advancing her agenda.

[homersapien 9,742]

No, I was speaking about how Warren damaged her credibility with the fauxcahontas episode. She damaged her appeal to the common folks. She has handed any competitors a huge weapon.

My point was the ambiguity of how you stated it: "My problem is that fauxcahontas..." Surely I don't need to explain it?

Surely not. She has never been Native American.

Nope but she had no problem claiming native american heritage when that law professorship became available at Harvard. It was also well known Harvard was under, at least, some pressure to have minority representation in its law school faculty. She knew that. Its at least somewhat interesting that once she was tenured, she stopped listing her native american heritage on the faculty roster. Seems that's a character problem more than a credibility problem. If she'll lie about her heritage for her enrichment, I'd say its fair to assume she'll lie, much like Obama, whenever its expedient in advancing her agenda.

Again, no one with any sense of proportion would think that.

[homersapien 9,742]

But let's clear the air Blue and get back to the real topic:

Do you personally support further relaxation of the newly re-instituted financial regulations? Do you think we are better off to restore the conditions prior to the financial crisis?

[TheBlueVue 177]

No, I was speaking about how Warren damaged her credibility with the fauxcahontas episode. She damaged her appeal to the common folks. She has handed any competitors a huge weapon.

My point was the ambiguity of how you stated it: "My problem is that fauxcahontas..." Surely I don't need to explain it?

Surely not. She has never been Native American.

Nope but she had no problem claiming native american heritage when that law professorship became available at Harvard. It was also well known Harvard was under, at least, some pressure to have minority representation in its law school faculty. She knew that. Its at least somewhat interesting that once she was tenured, she stopped listing her native american heritage on the faculty roster. Seems that's a character problem more than a credibility problem. If she'll lie about her heritage for her enrichment, I'd say its fair to assume she'll lie, much like Obama, whenever its expedient in advancing her agenda.

Again, no one with any sense of proportion would think that.

No, I was speaking about how Warren damaged her credibility with the fauxcahontas episode. She damaged her appeal to the common folks. She has handed any competitors a huge weapon.

My point was the ambiguity of how you stated it: "My problem is that fauxcahontas..." Surely I don't need to explain it?

Surely not. She has never been Native American.

Nope but she had no problem claiming native american heritage when that law professorship became available at Harvard. It was also well known Harvard was under, at least, some pressure to have minority representation in its law school faculty. She knew that. Its at least somewhat interesting that once she was tenured, she stopped listing her native american heritage on the faculty roster. Seems that's a character problem more than a credibility problem. If she'll lie about her heritage for her enrichment, I'd say its fair to assume she'll lie, much like Obama, whenever its expedient in advancing her agenda.

Again, no one with any sense of proportion would think that.

Well I have an excellent sense of proportion and when it comes to people, Ive always subscribed the the age old adage. fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. People that lie get one chance and she had hers. Funny that politicians lying is A-OK with you.....presumably, as long as they're leftists. :-\

[TheBlueVue 177]

But let's clear the air Blue and get back to the real topic:

Do you personally support further relaxation of the newly re-instituted financial regulations? Do you think we are better off to restore the conditions prior to the financial crisis?

To be perfectly candid. I dont know but I dont think we'll have to worry about relaxing the regs to the prior standards.

Edited January 12, 2015 by TheBlueVue

[homersapien 9,742]

But let's clear the air Blue and get back to the real topic:

Do you personally support further relaxation of the newly re-instituted financial regulations? Do you think we are better off to restore the conditions prior to the financial crisis?

To be perfectly candid. I dont know but I dont think we'll have to worry about relaxing the regs to the prior standards.

Well, do you support the last GOP-led initiative which recently failed?