iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Senate Passes Financial Reform Bill, 59-39

AP / Huffington Post   First Posted: 05/20/10 09:51 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 05:30 PM ET

Financial Regulation Bill

WASHINGTON — Prodded by national anger at Wall Street, the Senate on Thursday passed the most far-reaching restraints on big banks since the Great Depression. In its broad sweep, the massive bill would touch Wall Street CEOs and first-time home buyers, high-flying traders and small town lenders.

The 59-39 vote represents an important achievement for President Barack Obama, and comes just two months after his health care overhaul became law. The bill must now be reconciled with a House version that passed in December. A key House negotiator predicted the legislation would reach Obama's desk before the Fourth of July.

The legislation aims to prevent a recurrence of the near-meltdown of big Wall Street investment banks and the resulting costly bailouts. It calls for new ways to watch for risks in the financial system and makes it easier to liquidate large failing financial firms. It also writes new rules for complex securities blamed for helping precipitate the 2008 economic crisis, and it creates a new consumer protection agency.

It would impose new restraints on the largest, most interconnected banks and demand proof that borrowers could pay for the simplest of mortgages.

"Our goal is not to punish the banks but to protect the larger economy and the American people from the kind of upheavals that we've seen in the past few years," Obama said earlier Thursday after the Senate cleared a key 60-vote hurdle blocking final action.

The financial industry, Obama said, had tried to stop the new regulations "with hordes of lobbyists and millions of dollars in ads."

Two Democrats, Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Russ Feingold (D-WI), voted against the bill. Four Republicans, Sens. Scott Brown (R-MA), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Chuck Grassley (R-IA), voted in favor of the bill.

In a statement released after the vote, Feingold explained that the legislation does not address the root causes of the financial crisis:

"The bill does not eliminate the risk to our economy posed by 'too big to fail' financial firms, nor does it restore the proven safeguards established after the Great Depression, which separated Main Street banks from big Wall Street firms and are essential to preventing another economic meltdown. The recent financial crisis triggered the nation's worst recession since the Great Depression. The bill should have included reforms to prevent another such crisis. Regrettably, it did not."

Cantwell echoed Feingold's concerns in a separate statement after the vote:

"While this bill takes much needed steps to help prevent a crisis of this magnitude from ever happening again, it fails to close the very same loopholes in derivatives trading that led to the biggest economic implosion since the Great Depression," Senator Cantwell said. "Throughout this debate I have fought hard against efforts to weaken this legislation as well as to pass language to strengthen it further. But the fact of the matter is, without key reforms in derivatives trading, this bill does not safeguard America's economy from a repeat of this crisis.


It sets up a process for responding the next time we have a financial crisis, but it doesn't prevent this kind of thing from ever happening again. We have to stop these kinds of dangerous activities. We need stronger bans on banks gambling with depositors' money. We need bright lines - like Glass-Steagall - that separate risky activities from the traditional banking system. We need to refocus our financial system away from synthetic bets and get more capital into the hands of job creators and Main Street businesses. There are good, strong provisions in this bill, and I'm proud of the work we did to get them in there, but I fear that without closing the loopholes primarily responsible for this economic meltdown, we are missing the entire heart of the matter."

The Senate passed the bill without the Merkley-Levin amendment, an addition that would have imposed stricter language on the "Volcker Rule." Named after Obama economic adviser Paul Volcker, the "Volcker Rule" bars commercial banks from using taxpayer-backed money to trade for their own gain. Without the Merkley-Levin amendment, sponsored by Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Carl Levin (D-MI), regulators who were blamed for their lack of oversight preceding the financial crisis will be empowered to shape the "Volcker Rule" and possibly water it down.

Levin and Merkley's amendment was never debated on the Senate floor. Instead, "last-minute maneuvering" killed it. Levin said that it showed "the power of Wall Street," reports Reuters:

Last-minute maneuvering on the Senate floor killed two controversial amendments: one to tighten proposed restrictions on risky trading by banks, and another exempting car dealers that do not finance their own lending to auto buyers from oversight by a new federal consumer watchdog.

Republicans withdrew the auto-dealer amendment, offered by Senator Sam Brownback, so that the bank trading amendment, offered by Democrats Jeff Merkley and Carl Levin, would not come to a vote. It is firmly opposed by major financial firms.

Twice the Senate had to beat back efforts by Republicans to delay the bill before achieving final passage.

"The decisions we've made will have an impact on the lives of Americans for decades to come," said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., who voted against the legislation. "Judgment will not be rendered by self-congratulatory press releases, but, rather, by the marketplace. And the marketplace does not give credit for good intentions."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
WASHINGTON — Prodded by national anger at Wall Street, the Senate on Thursday passed the most far-reaching restraints on big banks since the Great Depression. In its broad sweep, the massive bil...
WASHINGTON — Prodded by national anger at Wall Street, the Senate on Thursday passed the most far-reaching restraints on big banks since the Great Depression. In its broad sweep, the massive bil...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8,021
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (112 total)
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Chernynkaya
05:12 PM on 05/21/2010
OK, is there any more Progressive news show than Amy Goodman's "Democracy Now"? Nope.

Here's what they say about the financial reform legislation: (spoiler alert--the legislation is not that bad)

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/5/21/senate_passes_sweeping_financial_reform_bill
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:07 PM on 05/21/2010
are these idiots(39 republicans) who voted against financial reform serious? just how can they fix their mouths to say they speak for the people and are planning some big return to power come November and in 2012....what a joke and I sure hope the dems convey in their message how completely aflight from reality and the american people these clowns are .....
Henri101
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignor
03:05 PM on 05/21/2010
Grassley finally came to his senses. Can somebody please let me know how Grassley's grandparents died? He kept repeating "pull the plug on grandmama during the health care debate, was he confessing something?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Librick
May the four winds blow you safely home
01:54 PM on 05/21/2010
It's something and that's good but still way less than half a loaf, again. I understand that compromise is how things get done but after the health care bill, at least the democrats could have given their loyal constituency enough to make a sandwich.

They should reflect on who it is that really butters their bread.
01:45 PM on 05/21/2010
Doesn't it give you that warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there are two real fighters in the democratic party? To bad our president isn't as committed to doing the right thing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EWeiss
03:51 PM on 05/21/2010
Maria Cantwell is pretty cozy with big business. Feingold is great on civil liberty issues, but only so-so on economic ones.

I mean I've heard what you're saying before - there's a reflexive dislike of anything the President does, but how on earth did Cantwell become the voice of the worker at the expense of, I dunno, Sherrod Brown?
04:52 PM on 05/21/2010
Don't know but I do love Brown. I had high hope in Obama but we needed a fighter more than a care taker.
photo
moose and squirrel
Very soon we would both be completely twisted...
01:23 PM on 05/21/2010
too much is being made of TBTF. keeping banks from reckless gambling is what needs to be fixed, not limiting the size of banks
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EWeiss
03:53 PM on 05/21/2010
I agree, but I think the two are related. TBTF came about because after deregulations, banks were able to put their tentacles in EVERYTHING. Now they're investment houses, hedge-funds, banks, and insurance firms all in one, and if one part of their structure goes down they take everything with it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:03 PM on 05/21/2010
Google: Bailouts of Nations Are Economic Suicide by Dr. Dominick Maglio

on Tampa Bay Online.com
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Chubbster
Partisanship is a mental illness
05:15 PM on 05/22/2010
Ditto for bailouts of fraudster banksters.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rougebaisers
12:49 PM on 05/21/2010
My used toilet paper will do more to reform the Banksters than this useless tripe of a bill.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Chubbster
Partisanship is a mental illness
05:18 PM on 05/22/2010
As Obama praised the bill, a rat crossed in front of the podium. This bill is another triumph of show, display and manipulated perceptions over anything meaningful.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
porsche996
an inelastic scattering of photons
12:47 PM on 05/21/2010
OK, assuming that these people know what they're doing...and the President is not lying...then this legislation is sufficient to create reform of the financial industry to address the most egregious issues of risk and vulnerability right?

So following that logic, that would mean that we the people are being mostly badly served, misinformed, agitated and provoked by the MSM that doesn't know it's a s s from a hot rock and is only interested in the crisis du jeur in order to maintain income and ratings.

Trust the President, this reform is better than none, it's the regulations that will be written from these laws that matter.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:11 PM on 05/21/2010
No.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
porsche996
an inelastic scattering of photons
12:39 PM on 05/21/2010
"Frankly, the Banks own this place"

Senator Durbin
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jannsmoor
12:24 PM on 05/21/2010
Since we refuse to hold Wall Street accountable by "punishing" them, you know, like we would say a drug dealer or bank robber or car thief, the lesson for them is to do whatever they can to defraud the public. Without punishment, there will be no reform. Without punishment, we will have another Wall Street induced meltdown.
This is not the change I voted for.
07:32 PM on 05/21/2010
Well, that may be so but I'd not trade places with anyone that has caused the kind of suffering these people have. Life is short and what happens after may take a long time.
Just another perspective.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
evekendall
12:13 PM on 05/21/2010
The next time we have a financial meltdown caused by banks that are "too big to fail," I wonder how President Obama plans to explain that he and a Democratic Congress failed to fix the problem. Where is the fight in this man?
12:01 PM on 05/21/2010
Just a thought...

How many of us are shrieking about Wall Street as our retirement funds are used by them to do with - pretty much anything they wish?
It's ten o'clock. Do you know what YOUR money is doing?
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
gladys46
Know Your Interests, Vote
12:16 PM on 05/21/2010
I receive from my Board of Pensions a quarterly report!! The last one plainly states that in anticipation of a lower return environment from domestic equities, the Board has altered the pension fund's asset allocations. I appreciate receiving a "glossary of terms" from my pension plan. The absolute returns, large caps, priviate equity and small caps!!

In answer to your question without getting too personal ... YES I DO !!
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
gladys46
Know Your Interests, Vote
12:18 PM on 05/21/2010
Oh, btw .. tomorrow is my birthday ... since I've gotten so old, I don't need to fear dying young!!
07:30 PM on 05/21/2010
Well then. judging from these two posts, you are obviously one cool lady.

from another that doesn't need to worry about dying young. (regardless of how I treated myself back then)
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
RichPort
Don't blame me, I'm a stoned head...
11:55 AM on 05/21/2010
The Senate's version of reform is tepid at best. We'll have to hope the House is a bit more realistic about dealing with the systemic issues at hand. That's not to say the bill is garbage, but it falls short of what is needed, and we can't blame this one on e the Gopers.
11:44 AM on 05/21/2010
the gop is starting to look spineless. what is the matter...no one willing to filibuster since dems didn't get the 60 vote filibuster-proof majority?
08:25 PM on 05/21/2010
Heartless...sometimes brainless...but never spineless.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Chubbster
Partisanship is a mental illness
05:20 PM on 05/22/2010
Spineless? Brain-dead.