EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

New Banking Regulations: Obama Seeks Bigger Banking Restrictions (VIDEO)

First Posted: 3/23/10 Updated: 5/25/11

JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama stepped up his campaign against Wall Street on Thursday with a far-reaching proposal for tougher regulation of the biggest banks.

"We have to get this done," Obama said at the White House. "If these folks want a fight, it's a fight I'm ready to have."

It was a stern, populist lecture from the president to Wall Street for what he perceives as its abandonment of Main Street. Obama said the government should have the power to limit the size and complexity of large financial institutions as well as their ability to make high-risk trades.

He said it wasn't appropriate that banks have been able to run these trading operations with the protections afforded to regular banking services.

"We have to enact commonsense reforms that will protect American taxpayers and the American economy from future crises," Obama said. "For, while the financial system is far stronger today than it was one year ago, it's still operating under the same rules that led to its near-collapse."

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Joining Obama for the announcement were former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who heads the president's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, and William Donaldson, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission under President George W. Bush. Volcker and Donaldson have advocated stronger restrictions on banks.

Overhauling financial rules is the one issue on Obama's legislative agenda that appears still alive after Democrats' devastating loss Tuesday in the Massachusetts Senate race. The White House is renewing Obama's demand for an independent consumer financial protection agency as part of any overhaul. That's one of the major sticking points in the Senate; the House has passed its version already.

The new proposal from Obama intends to limit speculation by commercial banks and to keep financial institutions from growing so big that they pose a risk to the economic system.

"When you see more and more of the financial sector basically churning transactions and engaging in reckless speculation and obscuring underlying risks in a way that makes a few people obscene amounts of money but doesn't add value to the economy -- and in fact puts the entire economy at enormous risk -- then something's got to change," Obama said in an interview released Thursday by Time magazine.

Obama has branded bank executives as "fat cats" and proposed a fee on large banks to cover shortfalls in the government's $700 billion financial rescue fund.

Expanding on earlier measures, Obama endorsed Volcker's proposal to restrict proprietary trading by commercial banks. That would separate commercial banks from investment banks, a line blurred a decade ago by the repeal of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act.

This restriction would affect some of the biggest banks, including Bank of America Corp., Goldman Sachs and Citigroup Inc.

"The better answer is to modernize the regulatory framework and not take the industry and the economy back to the 1930s," said Scott Talbott, chief lobbyist for the Financial Services Roundtable, an industry group that represents large Wall Street institutions.

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said Thursday it earned $4.79 billion in the fourth quarter as its trading business again outdistanced the rest of the industry. The company rewarded its employees with $16.2 billion in salaries and bonuses for 2009, 47 percent more than the previous year but still lower than many had expected.

There was a new urgency in the Senate to respond to the voter anger at Wall Street and bank bailouts that helped propel Republican Scott Brown to victory in Massachusetts for the seat long held by Democeatic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who died in August.

Brown's victory gave Republicans 41 votes, enough to mount successful filibusters and prevent Democratic legislation on health care or climate change from getting final votes.

But financial regulations could survive.

Administration officials believe that while Republicans may seek to block other aspects of the president's agenda, Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is considering making financial regulations an exception.

---

President Obama's remarks, as prepared for delivery.

Good morning, everybody. I just had a very productive meeting with two members of my Economic Recovery Advisory Board: Paul Volcker, who's the former chair of the Federal Reserve Board; and Bill Donaldson, previously the head of the SEC. And I deeply appreciate the counsel of these two leaders and the board that they've offered as we have dealt with a broad array of very difficult economic challenges.

Over the past two years, more than seven million Americans have lost their jobs in the deepest recession our country has known in generations. Rarely does a day go by that I don't hear from folks who are hurting. And every day, we are working to put our economy back on track and put America back to work. But even as we dig our way out of this deep hole, it's important that we not lose sight of what led us into this mess in the first place.

This economic crisis began as a financial crisis, when banks and financial institutions took huge, reckless risks in pursuit of quick profits and massive bonuses. When the dust settled, and this binge of irresponsibility was over, several of the world's oldest and largest financial institutions had collapsed, or were on the verge of doing so. Markets plummeted, credit dried up, and jobs were vanishing by the hundreds of thousands each month. We were on the precipice of a second Great Depression.

To avoid this calamity, the American people -- who were already struggling in their own right -- were forced to rescue financial firms facing crises largely of their own creation. And that rescue, undertaken by the previous administration, was deeply offensive but it was a necessary thing to do, and it succeeded in stabilizing the financial system and helping to avert that depression.

Since that time, over the past year, my administration has recovered most of what the federal government provided to banks. And last week, I proposed a fee to be paid by the largest financial firms in order to recover every last dime. But that's not all we have to do. We have to enact common-sense reforms that will protect American taxpayers -- and the American economy -- from future crises as well.

For while the financial system is far stronger today than it was one year ago, it's still operating under the same rules that led to its near collapse. These are rules that allowed firms to act contrary to the interests of customers; to conceal their exposure to debt through complex financial dealings; to benefit from taxpayer-insured deposits while making speculative investments; and to take on risks so vast that they posed threats to the entire system.

That's why we are seeking reforms to protect consumers; we intend to close loopholes that allowed big financial firms to trade risky financial products like credit defaults swaps and other derivatives without oversight; to identify system-wide risks that could cause a meltdown; to strengthen capital and liquidity requirements to make the system more stable; and to ensure that the failure of any large firm does not take the entire economy down with it. Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a bank that is "too big to fail."

Now, limits on the risks major financial firms can take are central to the reforms that I've proposed. They are central to the legislation that has passed the House under the leadership of Chairman Barney Frank, and that we're working to pass in the Senate under the leadership of Chairman Chris Dodd. As part of these efforts, today I'm proposing two additional reforms that I believe will strengthen the financial system while preventing future crises.

First, we should no longer allow banks to stray too far from their central mission of serving their customers. In recent years, too many financial firms have put taxpayer money at risk by operating hedge funds and private equity funds and making riskier investments to reap a quick reward. And these firms have taken these risks while benefiting from special financial privileges that are reserved only for banks.

Our government provides deposit insurance and other safeguards and guarantees to firms that operate banks. We do so because a stable and reliable banking system promotes sustained growth, and because we learned how dangerous the failure of that system can be during the Great Depression.

But these privileges were not created to bestow banks operating hedge funds or private equity funds with an unfair advantage. When banks benefit from the safety net that taxpayers provide -- which includes lower-cost capital -- it is not appropriate for them to turn around and use that cheap money to trade for profit. And that is especially true when this kind of trading often puts banks in direct conflict with their customers' interests.

The fact is, these kinds of trading operations can create enormous and costly risks, endangering the entire bank if things go wrong. We simply cannot accept a system in which hedge funds or private equity firms inside banks can place huge, risky bets that are subsidized by taxpayers and that could pose a conflict of interest. And we cannot accept a system in which shareholders make money on these operations if the bank wins but taxpayers foot the bill if the bank loses.

It's for these reasons that I'm proposing a simple and common-sense reform, which we're calling the "Volcker Rule" -- after this tall guy behind me. Banks will no longer be allowed to own, invest, or sponsor hedge funds, private equity funds, or proprietary trading operations for their own profit, unrelated to serving their customers. If financial firms want to trade for profit, that's something they're free to do. Indeed, doing so -- responsibly -- is a good thing for the markets and the economy. But these firms should not be allowed to run these hedge funds and private equities funds while running a bank backed by the American people.

In addition, as part of our efforts to protect against future crises, I'm also proposing that we prevent the further consolidation of our financial system. There has long been a deposit cap in place to guard against too much risk being concentrated in a single bank. The same principle should apply to wider forms of funding employed by large financial institutions in today's economy. The American people will not be served by a financial system that comprises just a few massive firms. That's not good for consumers; it's not good for the economy. And through this policy, that is an outcome we will avoid.

My message to members of Congress of both parties is that we have to get this done. And my message to leaders of the financial industry is to work with us, and not against us, on needed reforms. I welcome constructive input from folks in the financial sector. But what we've seen so far, in recent weeks, is an army of industry lobbyists from Wall Street descending on Capitol Hill to try and block basic and common-sense rules of the road that would protect our economy and the American people.

So if these folks want a fight, it's a fight I'm ready to have. And my resolve is only strengthened when I see a return to old practices at some of the very firms fighting reform; and when I see soaring profits and obscene bonuses at some of the very firms claiming that they can't lend more to small business, they can't keep credit card rates low, they can't pay a fee to refund taxpayers for the bailout without passing on the cost to shareholders or customers -- that's the claims they're making. It's exactly this kind of irresponsibility that makes clear reform is necessary.

We've come through a terrible crisis. The American people have paid a very high price. We simply cannot return to business as usual. That's why we're going to ensure that Wall Street pays back the American people for the bailout. That's why we're going to rein in the excess and abuse that nearly brought down our financial system. That's why we're going to pass these reforms into law.

Thank you very much, everybody.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama stepped up his campaign against Wall Street on Thursday with a far-reaching proposal for tougher regulation of the biggest banks. "...
JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama stepped up his campaign against Wall Street on Thursday with a far-reaching proposal for tougher regulation of the biggest banks. "...
Filed by Nick Graham  | 
 
  • Comments
  • 5,390
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (105 total)
09:48 AM on 01/30/2010
Obama has two choices: He can take the profits away from the banks by imposing a big tax on them, ultimately slowing down credit. Or, he can encourage the banks to lend money. Banks must lend money to sltimulate the recovery. Reforming them at this time, may halt the recovery. Sad to say, you can't have it both ways! Everyone is outraged with the bonus' that are shelled out to undeservin­g CEO's. But, there are some good banks who have played by the rules. We must be careful not to "throw out the baby with the bath water." A sweeping plan to tax banks who repaid their TARP loans with interest reflects the President'­s inexperien­ce in Banking. I am equally concerned with the overall lack of private sector experience held by this entire administra­tion. Certainly there are institutio­ns such as Bank of America who probably need to be broken up. But there are other banks which have "played by the rules." We must not create a landscape that makes it harder for American consumers and small businesses to obtain credit. The proposed legislatio­n does just that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
auteur
03:48 PM on 01/23/2010
Through Septt. 08' Republican administra­tions had accumulate­d 82% of the total $11 trillion debt: FACT

I'd like to see the TeaSacs put that on their bumperstic­kers.

Below is a graph easy enough for a Teabagger who sees 4D to figure out, .... .....box headed misanthrop­es.

http://2.b­p.blogspot­.com/_ayqJ­QdMcGxw/S1­qNzyHKOTI/­AAAAAAAAAD­w/raNuZwFx­D-U/s1600-­h/Natl_Deb­t_Chart.jp­g

Here's a link to the definition of Misanthrop­e for the Tro lls too:

http://www­.thefreedi­ctionary.c­om/misanth­ropes

Yeah, maybe I am just a little elitist?
08:17 PM on 01/22/2010
TOO litle, TOO LATE!!!!
05:35 PM on 01/22/2010
I'm not sure what needs to be done in order to get the attention of bankers. Somethings need to change fast. Until the enconomy improves save your hard earned money. Support local banks and improve your credit score. Get more financial tips from http://www­.score1st.­com
01:39 PM on 01/22/2010
I certainly agree with most of the posts on here stating that this is where this president should have started all along. The American People want to see a proactive president. They are interested in a leader that is focused on the interest of the people as a whole and not Washington­/ New York fat cats milking the system. Perhaps now Obama will become the president he should have been a year ago. Time will tell.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mountainweb
05:29 PM on 01/22/2010
As long as it is kept in mind that this is a "proposal" for tougher regulation of the biggest banks. It has to get past the current democratic­ally controlled congress and senate who have sold their souls to these very institutio­ns of finance, and in the past they have mastered the art of killing regulation­s. Pelosi, she who would be "queen of the US", is not going to do obama any favors if she can help it.
01:00 PM on 01/22/2010
This is where he should have started with the reforming of the financial system. If Obama would have started here where the big trouble started he would have a lot of capital to bring other reforms into place. He has to set his priorities where the people want them. I'm all for HC reform but it would have been much easier after the financial regulation­s were put into place. Now Obama has to get that trust back from the people who put him in office and please forget about this bipartisan bs they want to take him down they have said so to many times that they want him to fail and since this involves America they want America to fail. The Supreme Court has made this horrendous mistake letting Corporatio­n use any amount of money they want to push their agenda. I believe the SC has been taken over by Corporate America also. They are way out there with over stepping in 2000 to put a president in place in this country then this Corporatio­n give away. What Constituti­on are they upholding is what I want to know?
12:07 PM on 01/22/2010
Part 4
I thought progressiv­es were more progressiv­e in their actions as well as intellect and ideas than this. Your loyalty goes as far as your personal needs and then you start crying. No better than the republican­s whose only goal is to be in charge. You have lost insight into process, timing, obstructio­n and yes even set-backs. You exasperate real progressiv­es and real loyal democrats and independen­ts.

Again, people like it or not he inherited a heap of a mess. It is not an excuse it is fact whether you want to hear it or not. His own agenda had to take a back seat to the most pressing of issues, so the logical conclusion is everything he wanted to do will not get done instantly. And guess what? He told us that BEFORE he was sworn into office? I know there is a whole lot of short-term memory loss going on.

And for the record, I have also not been happy with a number of decisions made since he got into office nor the pace. I wish he could move my personal agenda for the country forward a little quicker as well, but as an adult I understand things have to, must and always take time.

With all he has had to deal with, he has done a magnificen­t job as President and deserves our full support. He should hear from us when we are unhappy, but we need to offer solutions in addition to rebuke.
02:03 PM on 01/22/2010
Wow, CLJ.., it is great to see someone identify the issues so succinctly­. There are so many issues at stake in our Country; we all need to take a breath and remember how we got to these places and how long it took us to get here! We will not climb out of this ditch overnight. That is the one thing that ticks me off with Democrats and populace - stop letting Republican­s distract you from the real work and letting them frame the message. They do it every time. President Obama's team need to check the delayed response syndrome and get in front of messages MUCH MORE QUICKLY; the Republican­s take advantage of the lug in direction and fills the space with more lies. Just as last August - when we lost momentum for the HC issue. Now, everybody wants to run scared; NO TIME; too much work to do! Suck it up and get it together - the HC is needed, financial regulation­s are needed, strong leadership is needed and Democratic cohesivene­ss is required to stay the course. So tired of the hype and MSM is so lazy that they repeat the rhetoric rather than do the homework to really push the story forward - no, these are the talking points and it is time for somebody else to prove the LIE or not!
12:06 PM on 01/22/2010
Part 3
Why aren't you holding congress responsibl­e? They are charged with crafting legislatio­n, and passing it on to the executive branch (the president) to affirm or veto. Where is the accountabi­lity for those lying republican­s and those spineless democrats? The President is not supposed to do their jobs. If anything, this has revealed just how shiftless, lazy and corrupt of spirit both houses of congress really are, except for a few.

Gitmo closing is not a matter of changing the locks on the doors. Every time the president makes a step in the direction of his campaign promise the republican­s again feign shock. The new shock: the US couldn't possibly try alleged terrorists in our system of jurisprude­nce and put them in our prisons if convicted. So again there is a delay.

Anger at Wall Street for bailouts, bonuses? Oh please! Why aren't you holding republican­s responsibl­e who pushed back when the issue of Wall Street, compensati­ons caps came up in February, 09 by this President and some in congress? They didn’t want to do it, now they pretend they are outraged.

Why aren't you holding spineless democrats who have the majority in everything and act as if they are helpless to move legislatio­n forward because they now have 59 seats in the senate and not 60? This simply stuns me every time I hear it.
photo
TheInconvenientTruth
Sometimes the Truth Can Be Brutal
01:31 PM on 01/22/2010
Excellent Posts...th­e entire series. Sober, realistic assessment­s such as these seem to be in short supply nowadays.
12:05 PM on 01/22/2010
Part 2
You don't even have an appreciati­on for the complexiti­es involved in accomplish­ing his campaign agenda, nor for the challenges of someone else’s failed agenda (Bush) he was faced with having to fix when he got here. All you know is he has not done the one thing that was important to you! This is so short-sigh­ted.

What are you doing to help? Are you working in your community, sending him ideas and suggestion­s (since you all know so much)? What are you doing except posting such nonsense as if you are small children that have not been taught, you don't get everything you want...whe­n you want it...somet­hing's have to wait, others things take time, and oh and by the way you have some responsibi­lity in this thing too.

He is working and can only get done as much as is possible for one human being in any given time period which is why we give Presidents 4 years to get things done OR to at least turn things around in a way as to warrant a second 4 year term. This President hasn't had 4 minutes from grief since he got here. You are expecting him to fix 8 years of madness in 2 months or even 1 year and to not act like a dictator in the process.
12:05 PM on 01/22/2010
Part 1 –
I have been reading comments for a while now and I have had enough of this insanity. It is as if children are on this board. Don't we teach our children the art of patience? Don't we teach them that instant gratificat­ion should not be the goal in life all of the time?

This man has been in office for one year yet the truth is you have all been complainin­g about him from day one (the trolls). The rest of you (so-called­) progressiv­es turned on him in month 2 and have not stopped yet.

He was not installed as king or dictator, yet most of you act as if he should behave as one. Do you understand the republic you live in? Do you understand the type of government that was put in place to prevent a dictatorsh­ip?

If he even attempted to run roughshod over congress, rule of law, constituti­on you would all be screaming that he is a fascist dictator (ironicall­y, you didn't scream at all (trolls) when Bush did just that ) . You can't have it both ways. He is working within the perimeters that are set by the government we have. Think about your own selves, can you get every thing you want done at once even if you really, really want to?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:21 AM on 01/22/2010
I voted for Obama and I'd vote foe him again but it appears that he still doesn't care about the folks who voted for him! I just read an article stating that we are going to PAY the Taliban in Afghanista­n to re-locate to other areas of Afghanista­n while our citizens are still losing their jobs and foreclosur­es are not slowing down one iota! Btw we are spending BILLIONS to rebuild the Afghan infrastruc­ture! Remember that when you're driving over a bridge or freeway overpass and don't forget about the tragic overpass collapse in Minnesota a couple of years ago! And whatever happened to all the BIG plans to rebuild our vastly outdated electric grid! What about the entire country's ancient water & sewage system that is WAY overdue to be REPLACED? I'm being selfish aren't I? Let's just keep throwing our tax $$$'s at foreign countries and never mind about our suffering citizens!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sposton
right to tell what they don't want to hear
11:42 AM on 01/22/2010
American Empire has its own thieving logic and is rapidly killing whatever we have left of our Republic. We have created a monster in National Security Act of 1947. If we do not revisit this issue soon this monster will eventually lead us into a total collapse.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidShort
11:16 AM on 01/22/2010
I guess if your popularity is plummeting because your policies are not working, and as the 'independe­nts' abandon you as they figure out what you truly want to do TO the country, it's time to retreat back to the same old tired refain, "Business is bad, we must tighten the reins on them."

This sells well with the anti-busin­ess crowd, the unions, the laid off, and the unemployed­. It is easy to play to the disaffecte­d. Promise them you will punish someone else for their situation and you have their vote. Ignore the fact that banks have a role in the economy of capitalizi­ng industry, which is what they do by loaning to companies. Ignore that without the capitalizi­ng power of the larger banks, industry does not run. No, no, no. The banks are evil and must be broken up and regulated. They must be forced to be 'customer service' organisati­ons, not businesses­.

This should be struck down by the Supreme Court as soon as it is signed. This will slow economic recovery, and delay anything resembling prosperity in this country for the life of this travesty.

Let's not forget the precedent this sets. Once we establish that 'large is bad', which this is saying, how will this ripple through the other industries­? Could this just be another attempt at a toe hold to de-Capital­ize this nation? I believe so. We are slipping back to the dark ages, it doesn't have to be this way.
10:43 AM on 01/22/2010
And i guess he's all concerned about losing jobs now making another speech in Ohio. Maybe the so call stimulate package that was to get the economy and jobs back on track should have actually been for that instead of PORK. But of course Obama said there is no pork so you tell me.the mad is out of touch with the American people and only after the ship is going down will he try and patch it ,so much for a visionary !!! LOL
10:40 AM on 01/22/2010
i tell ya here we go again more speeches. this is something that should have been address in the first 100 days in office but since he was in bed with the banks he wasn't going to do so until his poll # when south . If anyone here thinks he's doing this for the good of the American people than i have some land for sale in Haiti . Does it need to be regulated ? yes is he trying to save his As- ? Yes and it's so obvious . But don't think he's making any points with me this shoud have been done long ago.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sposton
right to tell what they don't want to hear
11:44 AM on 01/22/2010
Obama has lost most of his credibilit­y with me and he will have to earn it back by real deeds and not just by more empty words.
12:50 PM on 01/22/2010
Except for not stopping these 2 preemptive wars by GWBush it has been the Congress that has stopped everything­. The GOP said they were going all out to see that he failed and with Corporate America (greedy people that they are) they are doing that, so put the blame where it should be.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:35 AM on 01/22/2010
Nothing more than prestidigi­tation as far as I'm concerned.