Discussion: Bipartisan Revolt Imperils House Bill To Avert Government Shutdown

Discussion for article #231088

Of course, the president is going to come out and support it. He isn’t going to say that he wants the government to shut down even though he should because of this bullshit with Dodd-Frank and also campaign finance.

All the democrats need to stop rolling over and taking whatever the republicans want to give them. That’s how they lost the midterm elections.

13 Likes

Seems they should oppose it if they are just trying to undo everything in it. I imagine those are in there just to try and get the conservatives into it. However, they are on to the next thing. It must contain all GOP policy riders to be good for them.

As you know, spending bills are the best place for all issues to be hidden.

3 Likes

Good for the Progressive Caucus. Its simple economics, supply and demand: If Boehner wants/needs Dem votes to carry the bill, we DEMAND you don’t gut our already passed legislation.

14 Likes

“…staking on thin ice…”

?

5 Likes

“It said it objects to the weakening of Wall Street reform but signaled Obama would sign the bill anyway.”

Oh for fuck’s sake. It’s not like you have to run-for re-election Mr. President. Issue a veto-threat if this watering down of Wall St. regs is in the bill. Nobody on the left or right will scream if you hold firm on not giving away more of the farm to Wall St.

15 Likes

Republicans: Give us what we want or we’re going to shoot America Right In The HEAD!!!

Enough! E-fucking-nough!

3 Likes

Weakening campaign finance? After Citizen’s United there are still campaign finance laws? Who knew?

Democrats are going to be in a tougher position next congress. I blame our feckless leaders for quietly supporting the Wall Street provisions.

4 Likes

Between the giveaway to Wall Street, and the huge increase in allowable campaign contributions the current spending bill adds up to…we are going to let the banks screw the taxpayer if they give us more money.

It is total in your face, blatant bribery,and corruption. This what we have come to accept as normal. Our government is so broken,and out of control,its sad. I don’t know how it ever will change

4 Likes

Read the "it objects to the weakening of Wall Street reform part with a wink, wink. For the last six years the President is in the tank for Wall Street.

1 Like

“The Democratic opposition is being led by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA), who call the bank provision a giveaway to Wall Street”

That’s nice. You mind telling us why and what it says? You do nobody any favors with the superficial he-said-she-said approach.

4 Likes

I’d like to drive a skate through their microscopic hearts.

2 Likes

I’m more pissed off about them selling Apache Tribal lands to Rio Tinto than I am about the swaps push out deal.

4 Likes

He’s probably a little flummoxed right now because it’s obvious from his reporting yesterday that he didn’t foresee any significant Democratic opposition to the bill. Which is no doubt due to his lips being too firmly attached to Republican ass.

1 Like

Most of the things people like me want from “government” will be granted, because I am OLD. Because the geriatric bloc VOTES. Note that when Rethugs talk about “vouchers” for Medicare and scrapping Social Security, they confine their statements to younger folks (who are too distracted to even care about this).

In addition, the Climate Crisis will affect a 20-year-old more than me. If Florida becomes 10 feet underwater in 15 years, I would be 82.

A 20-year-old would be 35, just in time for an “underwater mortgage”.

The Climate Crisis alone should have brought out EVERY MILLENNIAL to vote against the Republican Party in 2014. I accept the blame for my generation (Boomers) not socializing and guiding the young sufficiently.

But I can’t understand someone so laid-back and distracted that he would not care to have a planet to live on. I saw a lot of battle between Boomers and Millennials on another thread and, as both sides duked it out, both sides “doubled down” (a trait which works fantastically in TV Westerns in which the screenwriters have the “good guys” always come through when THEY do it).

But what I could not understand was this…Suppose I, as a Millennial, could successfully out-argue every Boomer who ever posted on TPM, feel good and continue to Be The Ostrich, politically…That means the Planet will start to cool down tomorrow automatically, in time for me to live a few dozen more years?

6 Likes

I posed this question in another thread but perhaps you can answer it - If they push the derivatives out of federally insured entities won’t it force them into dark markets again?

I seem to recall the dark unregulated markets were a big concern for Brooksley Borne. It’s my understanding that as long as CDS’s are federally insured they have to be traded on open, regulated markets.

Why do you think the Dems are not whipping against the bill? What’s up with that?

2 Likes

Good for them. If it needs Dem votes to pass,Dems need to get something for those votes. House Dems aren’t gonna be in this position again for awhile.

3 Likes

No, it just means the banks will have to set up a separate subsidiary for derivatives, funding their trades with their own capital, rather than FDIC-insured deposits. That seems totally reasonable to me.

There is another odious provision in this funding bill-retirees in multi-employer plans will not get the full benefits they earned. That should be unacceptable-a guarantee on pensions should mean you get what was promised, not a pittance.

The bill is a turd and I don’t see what Democrats get in exchange for their votes. What Democratic priorities are in the bill? None, so far as I can see.

10 Likes

The only Democratic “priority” is that it keeps the government open. So basically the Wall Street lobby (and let’s face it…each of this add ons directly benefits Wall Street) decided they can play government shutdown to get their way, too.

5 Likes