With over 400 amendments readied for the committee debate on Senator Chris Dodd's financial reform package, Banking Chairman Dodd decided to ditch the democratic process and vote his own version of the bill out of committee. This moves the real debate to the Senate floor and worsens progressive's chance of improving the bill.
On Friday, Senators had readied their amendments which included dozens of Republican amendments that were clearly intended to draw out the debate and delay final action. After tweaking the bill over the weekend, Dodd moved for an up or down vote on his draft in committee. It passed on a strict party line vote 13-10. After a year of discussion, the committee "debate" and mark up took only 21 minutes.
Dodd said he was trying to avoid further partisan "polarization." Ranking republican Richard Shelby concurred with that view. "We're not going to the floor polarized. We're going to the floor right now in a spirit of trying to work a consensus bill, a meaningful substantive bill that I've said all along is what we need," Shelby said.
But a review of the amendments filed by both Democrats and Republicans indicated that not a lot of people on the Senate Banking Committee are happy with the Dodd draft.
Democrats had readied a dozen amendments to strengthen the bill including measures: to strengthen the Volcker Rule and the ban on proprietary trading, to create a truly independent stand-alone Consumer Financial Protection Agency, to impose maximum limits on leverage, to crack down on conflict of interest trading.
Republicans fielded hundreds of amendments to weaken the bill: to destroy the CFPA, to remove regulator's ability to oversee too big to fail institutions, to get rid of the industry-funded reserve to protect taxpayers from future bailouts, to weaken accounting rules and the like. The amendments also included a raft of date changes, a big bank delay strategy aided by Sens. Johanns, DeMint Vitter and Bunning.
Some will be sympathetic with Dodd's decision to move the bill to the floor and avoid a long drawn out fight, but it is clear that the move will also cost progressives. Now the
votes and the views of Democratic centrists once again take center stage.
At this point, the only slim hope of improving the bill is an alliance between progressive Democrats and key Republicans who are truly worried about too big to fail institutions and their death grip on the economy. There is no good way to "unwind" these systematically dangerous institutions, they must be prevented from growing too big to fail in the first place. Conservative Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) and progressive Alan Grayson (D-FL) managed to create a successful alliance to champion an audit of the Federal Reserve that has made it into both the House and Senate version of the bill. Will a new right-left team emerge in the Senate to move reform forward? Stay tuned.
Richard (RJ) Eskow: Waterloo Sunset: Financial Obstructionism Could Be GOP Political Suicide
Here's a word of advice for the opposition party: If you blockade financial reform and cozy up too publicly to the big banks, it could be your Waterloo.
Jason Paez: Yin/Yang at the Federal Reserve
Consumers need a strong, independent agency that does not have inherent conflict within its core mission statement.
What Senator Chris Dodd has put on the table will barely scratch the surface, given the changes that are needed to build a regulatory system that actually works.
That's the only thing that matters, at this point, when it comes to the financial regulation bill, and that's the only thing that should matter.
So, the question then becomes is working to push the bill to the left fringe going to make the process of getting the bill passed easier? Is going to the left fringe the path to beating the GOP filibuster? It's that simple!
From what I've seen, pushing the bill to the fringe won't get the bill passed. The best path forward, in my opinion, is to have Sen. Chris Dodd, who has shown that he has Democratic financial ideals in his heart, actively working to find as much consensus as possible with Bob Corker, which should bring 2-5 votes in play. That gives you a decent shot at getting to passage, because you would have 61-64"yes" votes in play.
Find as much negotiated consensus as you can, and then where consensus cannot be found, whomever has the majority, on that point, wins. After actively working to find as much consensus as possible, the votes for passage should be available, even if it only ends up being with 60 votes.
GOP Sour grapes for health care reform? Yes.
= negotiated Bipartisan Financial bill? No.
GOP Leadership won't let GOP negotiators vote in favor of the bill.
Dodd & Reid will have to find Another way to squeak to 60, and again do 'the impossible."
Dodd is retiring. It is absolutely ridiculous that he will not champion consumer needs on his way out the door! He obviously is thinking of his future job - to cash in on doing the bidding for the banks & Wall Street.
Can't some rich progressive PLEASE buy off Dodd with a big "mega-bucks" job, for after he leaves Congress, to work on behalf of consumers? George Soros - I'm talking to you.
There is no other problem facing us of greater importance!
This issue affects Every American, today, and will for many years to come. We need real systemic change, now, to end the too big to fail mentality and put the People and their representatives back in control of our country.
This will make two posts here.
Oh, but we do have "health reform," right?