Lobbyists Fret Over Bank Break-Up Proposals

The Hill reports that lobbyists for financial giants JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Prudential have held more than half a dozen meetings with lawmakers in the last 10 days to thwart legislation that could allow the government to preemptively break up large firms.

The main focus of their lobbying efforts are proposed amendments to the House Financial Services Committee's reform legislation that would give the Obama administration the ability to limit the size and scope of banking firms, giving the government the power to intervene in firms that are not failing.

Not surprisingly, the banking industry is bucking the attempts at greater government oversight, contending that nothing about the size of a company inherently poses a threat to the greater economy.

Bloomberg reports that the seven Wall Street lobbyists who tried to woo the staff of Rep. Paul Kanjorski, the amendment's sponsor, left with a sobering conclusion.

From Bloomberg:

Not only was Kanjorski serious, he planned to offer the legislation as early as next week -- and it just might pass.

Kanjorski's proposal would be sweeping, allowing the government to dismantle any firm whose size and risky practices may again threaten the financial system. Lawmakers are considering breakup proposals after overwhelming public outrage over the $700 billion banking bail-out of firms like Citigroup, AIG and Bank of America.

From The Hill:

"If we're going to give power to bail out companies when they are too large ... why don't we preemptively determine those corporations or financial institutions are 'too big to fail,' identify them and then make sure they don't remain too big to fail," Kanjorski recently said on CNBC.

Comments

[muguet]

Dismantle the corporatocracy -- it's an anathema to liberty.

[Chazmania]

Current score!
Bankers = 100 Americans = 0
OR Bankers= full say in policy making! American people= zero say!
It is undeniably clear Politicians are spokesmen for the Banking Mafia!

[Chazmania]

Also the fed needs to be retired! it is a tool for corrupting our money supply for the benefit of a few banking cartel families!

[Paul Abrams - Huffpost Blogger]

Go to www.breakupthebigbanks.com, sign the petition and join the fight...

[Chazmania]

Your link is not working! hear it is again
http://breakupthebigbanks.com/

[totaldisbelief]

Lobbyists = our unelected legislators

[satyriasis]

There is a description about the phenomena you; mentioned. It's often used in the context of neoliberalism, It's the "virtual parliament" Business corporations unseen and unelected decide government policy.

[NoMoreBail2]

We, the American people, dug ourselves into this hold for which there is no escape.a

hat tip to: http://financeopinionss.blogspot.com

[dart79]

Breaking up the banks will ensure competition, innovation, and safety to the system. Restoring Glass Stegal and reforming campaign financing are two critical changes that are needed.

[Bpeirce]

Lobbyists are the group responsible for killing what was once a great Country for most of its Citizens. These are the people that need to be eliminated.

[yourmonscalling]

Just letting them fail would be the right thing that was supposed to happen BUT the politicians saw that if they failed where would they get there campaign checks from ?? think i am kidding

you make your own decision the truth is out there

VOTE THEM ALL OUT IF YOU WANT REALCHANGE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY PEOPLE

ELECTION DAY IS COMING

[dukeitout]

Rep. Kanjorski: As a good American, I'm sure you are going to resist their bribery offers. We're counting on you.

[lvdragonlady]

If the banks get rid of ALL their lobbyists just maybe we will not break up the banks.....­..........­.
No, let's just get rid of the lobbyists, they serve only the companies they work for and NOT the people of America.

[NoMoreBail2]

No more bailouts for too big to fail. NO more stupid tax cuts and other gimmicks. Need more jobs, affordable education & heath care.

good articles; http://financeopinionss.blogspot.com

[Dreamwalker420]

Why must we "protect" ourselves from the "too big to fail" companies? Isn't the solution simple ... let them fail. Just like junior in second grade ... let him fail.

Failure is not an option? ... failure is a reality. This obsession we have believing that if we just regulate more than there will never be another failure. Failure is good. Failure is healthy. Failure rewards the hard-working savers of our economy.

Failure is just. And it is determined by only one thing: CASH. When a company no longer has enough money to pay it's expenses, it goes to bankruptcy court. BTW, bankruptcy is ALL the "resolution authority" we need. What Wall Street wants is to peek into the finances of major competitors and be given the opportunity to buy them or sell them BEFORE the rest of society knows how stinky Enron is.

The solution is very simple: Take back every penny of the bailout money. The banks that are bankrupt will fail instantly. Their management is gone. Their investors take a loss. Bondholders get reamed. And their assets are sold at auction to someone with CASH.

Not complicated. If the stock market drops to zero, I'll bid a penny. I'm sure that someone else will outbid me with a dollar? So zero is a myth. The markets aren't "failing" when they contract ... that's not a "meltdown" or a regulatory failure. Markets must be allowed to contract. Deflation is the only solution to the bailouts, mortgage foreclosures, health

[NiagaraFalls]

I'm all about a "show cause" order... I can't think of one good reason for banks this big to exist and continue to grow -and that's what will happen. What is one positive thing to come of it? (except of course all of the positives for upper management and the elite gambling staff)

They get so excited about the increase in stock value because it puts them in a stronger take-over position. They're out there taking over institutions that the government should take over and liquidate rather than sponsoring and financing.

[Rmath]

It's time to take down the mega-banks that are completely out of control.

[WhitneyKyle]

If we break them up, won't the same owners just own more banks?

[Nuyorican21]

Smaller banks, smaller profits, more incentives, and god forbid....­COMPETITIO­N??? What's worse than a corporate facist running a bank, a hundred corporate facists running one bank.