Reply With Quote
Without Gramm the en lement would never have been hidden in a bill - so, yeah, it was Gramm..
Yep. It was all Phil Gramm. Nevermind the 38 democrat senators and 155 democrat congressmen who voted for it, or the democrat president who signed it into law. It's all on Phil Gramm.
Without Gramm the en lement would never have been hidden in a bill - so, yeah, it was Gramm..
Bull , Dan.
"Securities futurization and modernization" had Larry Summers and Robert Rubin's fingerprints all over it. It wouldn't have passed without their blessing, and President Clinton woudn't have signed it if they thought it was a bad idea.
Gee, you're right. How devious of Gramm to hide the repeal of Glass Steagel Act in his bill by making it the very first section and calling it "Glass Steagel Act repeals". No way anyone was going to find that out.
http://banking.senate.gov/conf/fincon.pdf
Summers and Rubin had roles but they are small potatoes compared to the destruction that Phil Gramm did to our country for money...
...In the 1990s, as chairman of the Senate banking committee, he routinely turned down Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Arthur Levitt's requests for more money to police Wall Street;
.....in 1999, Gramm pushed through a historic banking deregulation bill that decimated Depression-era firewalls between commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, and securities firms—setting off a wave of merger mania....
......As Congress and the White House were hurriedly hammering out a $384-billion omnibus spending bill, Gramm slipped in a 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. Written with the help of financial industry lobbyists and cosponsored by Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), the chairman of the agriculture committee, the measure had been considered dead—even by Gramm. Few lawmakers had either the opportunity or inclination to read the version of the bill Gramm inserted. "Nobody in either chamber had any knowledge of what was going on or what was in it," says a congressional aide familiar with the bill's history....
...For starters, the legislation contained a provision—lobbied for by Enron, a generous contributor to Gramm—that exempted energy trading from regulatory oversight, allowing Enron to run rampant, wreck the California electricity market, and cost consumers billions before it collapsed. (For Gramm, Enron was a family affair. Eight years earlier, his wife, Wendy Gramm, as cftc chairwoman, had pushed through a rule excluding Enron's energy futures contracts from government oversight. Wendy later joined the Houston-based company's board, and in the following years her Enron salary and stock income brought between $915,000 and $1.8 million into the Gramm household.
MotherJonesBecause of the swap-related provisions of Gramm's bill—which were supported by Fed chairman Alan Greenspan and Treasury secretary Larry Summers—a $62 trillion market (nearly four times the size of the entire US stock market) remained utterly unregulated, meaning no one made sure the banks and hedge funds had the assets to cover the losses they guaranteed.
we as americans haven't really come to grips with the fact that it is impossible for us to go back to business as usual. Our former type of economy was completely unsustainable. they can paper over it all they want and it'll look a little better at times in financial markets, but until america as a whole starts getting more money coming in then goes out the problems will keep getting worse. Malinvestment needs to be allowed to die before the true recovery can begin.
...it's bad, but considering the size of the U.S. economy, it's not the end of the line yet chicken little... but to get on-track again we need private job creation to get tax revenue generating and people off social programs...the govt could easily manipulate unemployment numbers by hiring more, like under the GOP, but to Obama's credit he has not done that..
...which was apparently fully supported by Summers and Rubin, which would make them somewhat larger potatoes. But that would never hit your "progressive" radar. This article is chock full of opinion paraded as fact...motivations supplied by MJ and couched in bombastic verse....exactly the kind of nonsensical ranting you harp on the teabaggers for. You're quite gullible and the teabaggers welcome you.
I'm not up to speed on the whole blue text thing but I surmise it's reserved for sarcasm. You appear quite gullible, but I don't think the teabaggers would welcome you.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
