Who Will Take On the Banks?

It was smart of the top Democrats to cut presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich out of that South Carolina debate, where they lamely attempted to deal with the dire consequences of the banking meltdown without confronting the banks. They made all the proper concerned noises about millions of folks losing their retirement savings and homes, but none was willing to say what Kucinich would have said: Bankers are crooks who will steal from the public unless the government holds them accountable.

How do I know Kucinich would have said that? Because I interviewed him for the Los Angeles Times back when he was mayor of Cleveland and the banks foreclosed on his city after he refused to sell the public power plant. Others can talk a populist line, but Kucinich lived it. He was forced out of office that time, but voters realized 10 years later that Kucinich had been right. Thanks to the public power alternative that Kucinich refused to sacrifice, Cleveland had cheap power, and he was elected to the Ohio Legislature and then to Congress as his reward.

I bring this up now not to push a Kucinich presidential candidacy, which seems quite forlorn given the power of big money and big media to set the stage for permissible political debate, but rather to hold out a yardstick for measuring the "progressivism" of the top three Democrats. Sure, they all would be preferable to their likely Republican alternatives, although Sen. John McCain has been far better than all three Democrats on both campaign-finance reform and taking on the defense contractors who have been bleeding us dry since 9/11. I got a little worried when Sen. Hillary Clinton said she could do the best job in confronting McCain on national security; she is shameless in throwing money at war profiteers, while McCain has held the line on some of the more egregiously wasteful military expenditures.

With a military budget that has more than doubled since 9/11, soaking up trillions of dollars in obligations for future generations, it is stupid to argue about whether the Democrats or Republicans would spend more on needed domestic programs, because the money for those programs will not be available. Kucinich was the one candidate on the Democratic side willing to do what Rep. Ron Paul has in the Republican debates--challenge the phony patriotism of ripping off the taxpayers for war-fighting expenditures in Iraq and elsewhere, leaving us less secure.

While Paul is very good, indeed the best candidate, on the waste of taxpayer dollars on foreign military ventures, as is expected from a libertarian, he is hostile to the need for government regulation to control the excesses of the marketplace. And it is those excesses that are at the root of the financial chaos we have visited upon the world. As with the Enron scandal, which was the direct result of the bipartisan-supported deregulation of the energy industry, so too the subprime mortgage and easy-credit scandals now upon us. For decades, banking lobbyists have pushed through legislation freeing them to wreak havoc on our lives while they profit from lucrative personal bailouts even as their own companies suffer.

Deregulation became the mantra covering corporate theft in both Republican and Democratic administrations, and it is amazing that not one of her interlocutors at the South Carolina debate asked Sen. Clinton about her husband's signing of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which permitted banks, stockbrokers and insurance companies to merge, overturning one of the major regulatory achievements of the New Deal. More important, both political parties have refused to place any serious restraints on the interest charged by banks and think it perfectly normal, indeed healthful, for the economy that folks are given home loans or credit cards at unrealistically low interest rates calculated to soar after an introductory phase. What a sorry scene to see the top Democratic contenders unable to agree that some interest rates below 30 percent may rise to the level of usury.

For those unfamiliar with the moral crime of usury, believing it's only a legal crime if loan sharks threaten your knee caps, let me quote from Ezekiel 22:12 of the King James Bible: "... thou hast taken usury and increase, and thou hast greedily gained of thy neighbours by extortion, and hast forgotten me, saith the Lord God." Not being overly familiar with Scripture, I am grateful to Kucinich, a product of a stern Catholic upbringing, for having informed me, more than a quarter of a century ago, that the bankers, and the politicians who service them, are courting the wrath of God--even if they fool the voters.

Comments

[outnow]

Who indeed!

The deregulation and free trade policies are breaking the middle class. The New Deal legislation was intended to prevent this looting by financial corporations. Why did Bill Clinton allow consolidation of the media under the Telecommunications Act, why did he sign NAFTA and CAFTA and the WTO. Did Bill Clinton believe that the banks had become kinder, more ethical in their greed, or was he just bought off?

What it took FDR to accomplish, Bill Clinton at the urging of Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan signed away, adding the woes of "free trade" to the list of measures that would undermine the middle class.

It is said that Bill Clinton was the best Republican president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

What we now call Democrats is what are called "conservatives" in Europe. Our conservatives are really fascists - they have placed multinational corporations in control of our government. These are American companies in name only and own the media and the own the candidates.

Kucinich was the only real voice for the middle class and the disadvantaged. The rich will lose out in a recession, too. But they can weather it better. Edwards is the next best thing.

We need the firewall between the promoters the investors and the brokers.

[NeoAmerican]

I worked at corporate level in the banking industry for several years until the merger mania of the '90s. In retrospect, I have to say that bankers probably eclipse only the insurance industry in ethics. Drug dealers and thieves are most likely more productive members of society generally speaking.

[ConcernedAboutRFuture]

EDWARDS WILL!

[Paul]

How about the head of Countrywide? His company makes all those worthless loans, thousands lose their jobs or their houses, and he pockets $120 million when BofA buys him out. BofA will simply turn around and ask the government to bail them out, so we pick up the tab.

Meanwhile our prisons are full of petty drug dealers and shoplifters.

I'd like to see the head of Countrywide trying to spend his millions from inside a jail cell.

[fitCTmom]

If you don't like the terms of a loan, don't sign it. I am so tired of people crying about their loans. If you can't handle the payments, don't sign it. If you don't understand the terms ask a lawyer. If you live above your means and then get an "unexpected" rate hike in your mortgage, re-finance and get out of the ridiculous arm you signed. BOTTOM LINE: Home owner-ship is not a right its a priviledge and if you can't afford one do the unthinkable DON'T BUY IT!

[DemandTruth]

Actually, Edwards HAS been talking about this during his whole campaign. He, as well as Kucinich, has talked about fighting these corrupt entrenched businesses, and you do him and us a disservice by ignoring it.

Also, he has denounced war profiteering on more than one occasion and has said when he is president there won't be any more Blackwaters in Iraq. He does admit that you have to be pragmatic, and as far as we still need Blackwater et al. in Iraq while cleaning up the mess this misAdministration has made and making the transition, he'd make sure that Blackwater et al. was brought under the command of our military.

Maybe Edwards doesn't scream wild-eyed about these topics, but he does address them rationally and reasonably and has basically the same end goals as Kucinich.

Your treatment of Edwards is misleading and unfair. Oh, also, Edwards has ALSO lived the populist life - he grew up from modest means and had to work hard to achieve the American dream, and because of this he wants to make sure that all of us have the same opportunity to achieve our dreams that he had.

Go John Go!

[MrJoyboy]

It's the age-old story of the clever, the powerful and the amoral rigging the system to benefit themselves at the expense of the clueless and weak. It works the same way in any system of government--communist or capitalist or theocratic (eg, Muslim men lording it over their women).

[johannesrolf]

I know what let's do. bring back the top tax bracket of %90, like the US had during WW2 and during the Korean war. that should even things out a bit.

[zagyzebra]

To echo what a few other folks have commented on, Edwards is the only candidate of the three who is willing to fight the good fight against the corporations who are at the root of tearing down our democracy. He's the only candidate who not only routinely speaks about it, he hammers the issue home. And if you, in your position of authorship, are concerned about this matter, I suggest you arrange an interview with Edwards and dig behind the headlines into this man's proposed policies for controlling corporate greed. WE all NEED reporters to have the courage to break away from the two leading candidates and turn their attention on the viable third one, who actually is the most vociferous about the issue which concerns us all: US corporate power and greed on a runaway train wreck.

[WilliePilgrim]

Excellent observations. For those who are apprehensive about Ron Paul's postion of less government regulation; please note that the kind of relationship (if you can call this kind of abuse a "relationship") that the banks have with the government regulators isn't a problem because the regulations aren't tough or plentiful enough. The regulations, and there are lots of 'em, are written by the bankers themselves...as will be the next wave of 'em to assuage the ruffled feathers of those like us who have seen our communal treasure stolen.
While Ron Paul offers less obfuscating regulation he also offers more transparency and enforcement. The illusion that big and fat is powerful and happy is one that we've abandonned regarding our personal health and it would be good if we dragged our current system, kicking and screaming if must be, to a weight loss program of equal or greater effectiveness, just as we drag ourselves. Restraint is good. Small is better. Freedom of the individual is beyond price.

[giam]

Amen. Congratulations for voicing what needs to be said.
Bankers would like us to approach them hat in hand as if we were entering a church, when in fact they are just another den of thieves stealing from widows and orphans.

[WarrenPeace]

I do not mean to appear too flattering, but this piece is just so much wiser and substantial than the other HuffPo opinion pieces lately. While the celebrity media AND most bloggers encourage the bickering of the front running candidates, emphasizing the profoundly trivial, there are real problems and enduring problems -- and yes, sins -- that need to be recognized and cast out.

[faust2001]

They want to regulate our private lives, but use public money to bail out the banks. it's called "freedom."

[fairandjust]

Lacking of Banking Regulation and serious punishment is killing us. You never read or hear any media source or candidate speak about the FRAUD that has been committed by banks, who gave loans to unqualified persons.

Jack Welch from GE on CNBC this morning, spoke very negatively about John Edwards and how dare he complain about corporations!

I blame the corporate-owned media for refusing to give real coverage of any candidates like Kucinich and Edwards that are speaking about real issues that concern the non-wealthy americans.

[bmedich]

Can I suggest something fairly simple? Put a temporary ban on credit card advertising and distribution. Hell, maybe a permanent ban on advertising. We all know what credit cards do and where to get them. Should we allow the banks to lure even more people into a downward credit spiral? We banned the advertising of cigarettes, right? Credit cards seem to do just as much damage and are similarly addictive. The junkie analogy above is on the right track, but I think banks are the dealers, except that most dealers are probably more astute business men.