US Senate passes historic Wall Street overhaul (updated)

[ProSense]

US Senate passes historic Wall Street overhaul

WASHINGTON (AFP) – In a major victory for President Barack Obama, the US Senate passed the most sweeping overhaul of financial industry rules since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

By a 59-39 margin, lawmakers approved an ambitious effort to curb Wall Street excesses blamed for fueling the 2008 global economic meltdown, amid smoldering voter anger months before November mid-term elections.

The legislation, Obama's top domestic goal, must still be merged with the House of Representatives' rival version into a compromise measure before the final package can go to the president to sign into law.

House Financial Services Committee chair Barney Frank, a Democrat, told CNBC television that he foresaw smooth sailing and that "the president, I am certain now, will have signed this bill well before the Fourth of July."

more

Updated to add:

Senate Approves Sweeping Financial Regulations

<...>

Democratic Congressional leaders and the Obama administration must now work to combine the Senate measure with a version approved by the House in December, a process that is expected to take several weeks and be completed after Memorial Day.

While there are important differences — notably a Senate provision that would force big banks to spin off some of their most lucrative derivatives business into separate subsidiaries — the bills are broadly similar, making it virtually certain that Congress will adopt the most sweeping regulatory overhaul since the aftermath of the Great Depression.

<...>

The bill already contains a version of the Volcker rule, but the Merkley-Levin amendment would have gone farther in trying to prevent conflicts of interest between banks and their depository customers.

Congressional Republican leaders, adopting an election-year strategy to oppose virtually every initiative supported by the Obama administration, voiced loud criticism of the legislation while trying to insist that they still wanted tougher policing of Wall Street. At first they tried to stop debate on the bill, and then relented after the government sued Goldman Sachs and Republicans felt their opposition was politically untenable.

link

Roll Call

YEAs ---59
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brown (R-MA)
Burris (D-IL)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaufman (D-DE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---39
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Wicker (R-MS)

Not Voting - 2
Byrd (D-WV)
Specter (D-PA)

[Xipe Totec]

1. What we need is a Wall Street keelhaul nt

[bluestateguy]

2. And I'll ask again: What happened to the Levin -Merkley amendment?

Ugggghh!!! Where did that go???

[ProSense]

4. Merkley voted for the bill.

Kerry's statement indicated the bill is very strong.

[Renew Deal]

13. Did Dorgan get a vote on his amendment?

[katandmoon]

3. Oh goody, more fake reform.

[NJmaverick]

38. I will skip your ill informed opinion and listen to Nobel Prize winning Krugman

who described the bill as a "win"

[katandmoon]

44. Bwahahahahahaha! So all is forgiven between you and "bitter PUMA" Paul?

Heartwarming!

[David Zephyr]

5. I wish it were more, but it is a good step.

Hopefully, we can build from here.

[RandomThoughts]

6. Wanted to make a comment.

"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," said the president

That is a correct statement, but enforcement can also set judicial precedent. If punishment is merited by actions against law, then it would make sense to have trials on those subjects to establish law and justice.

If actions were morally wrong, it is difficult for the law to act, and requires other action. Although if morally wrong, and not illegal, then that is a reason to review laws and system structure.

[Cha]

7. That first sentence looks intriguing..

It's progress! Thank you.

[ej510]

8. Wall St democrats left a hole in this form bigger than the hole in the ozone layer.

[ProSense]

10. "Wall St democrats"

All 55 of them?

[Cha]

11. I'm looking at what has been done..

not what hasn't.

[angee_is_mad]

9. thanks for some positive news

K&R

[Renew Deal]

12. What's Cantwell's problem?

Why did she vote no?

[mucifer]

14. she and Feingold wanted to hold off on voting for it til they got more good stuff in it.

[bvar22]

15. Yes. They wanted good stuff like:

1)Actually doing something that will prevent another meltdown and public bailout.

2) Reinstating the Glass-Steagall protections, you know...the ones that work.

3)do something about "Too Big to Fail".

Unfortunately, these "Historic" "Reforms" do absolutely NOTHING about solving the REAL problems.
Some minor adjustments to a Failed system that WILL fail again.




WOO-fucking-HOO.
Which way to the Mission Accomplished Parade where our heroic Senators will be congratulating each other on their bravery in "taking on the big special interests"?
:patriot:

Champagne corks are a-popping in the Wall Street Boardrooms tonight.
Now THERE is a "Mission Accomplished".
The Wall Street Banks bought a Free Pass from the Democratic Party to Rape and Pillage the Economy again!

Even Chris Dodd admits that this "Historic Reform" will NOT prevent another meltdown and public bailout.

[Seneca]

24. Chris Dodd can fuck off

He is complicit in much of what led to today's problems. One of the phoniest Democrats this side of Lieberman (or Lieberman, pre-"Independent").

[bvar22]

36. I agree,

and the phony Chris Dodd is the chief architect of the Phony Reform.



"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[depakid]

16. The only thing historic in this is that it shows yet again that the Senate is incapable

of responding to the nation's problems with legislation that might actually deal with their root causes, rather than simply putting up window dressing.

[ProSense]

17. Do you even know what's in the bill? n/t

[depakid]

18. Know what's in it- and know what the House of Lords and their patrons made certain wasn't

(Namely, most of the provisions that would actually have dealt with the root causes of the problems).

Much as happened with the health care legislation....

[ProSense]

19. Did you just post something claiming that the Franken amendment wasn't in it?

Yes, you did.

[depakid]

28. No- claimed Dodd voted against it on the record

[Wednesdays]

20. What provisions would have "actually dealt with the root causes?"

:shrug:

[jefferson_dem]

35. Krugman disagrees.

Sorry. You lose...again.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/thank-you-lloyd-blankfein/

[TheKentuckian]

37. Much less than a ringing endorsement

The root causes are obviously both too big too fail and shadow banking. Krugman fails to mention the wild speculation which drains capital from actual investment, which is also not dealt with.

Resolution authority is an ass backward way of dealing with an easily preventable problem. Nothing wrong with such authority but the more practical and responsible way is to handle much of the problem by not allowing banks to grow so large with such penetration of crucial services and operation.

[Radical Activist]

21. Where's the hope and change?!?!?!!

Oh. Here it is.

[ej510]

22. More corporate garbage. Supported by the White House.

[ProSense]

23. More nonsense, supported by nothing. n/t

[impik]

30. Yea, no news there.

[thelordofhell]

31. DDU-----Debbie Downer Underground

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yFSpml8oSw

[Radical Activist]

26. Another debbie downer

who will never see the good in anything?

[NJmaverick]

39. and supported by Nobel Prize winning Paul Krugman

guess you screwed up in your "corporate garbage" assessment

[katandmoon]

45. Don't you mean *bitter PUMA* Paul?

[mkultra]

42. you got nothing. as always

[TheKentuckian]

25. The structural issues are still all here

We've got too big too fail which is addressed by bogus resolution authority, like they couldn't have been forced into bankruptcy before. The issue is the banks had reach such size and penetration that them going down threatened the entire economy. This problem is arguably worse now because the biggest banks are even larger now.

Lincoln's derivatives bill had some punch but it appears all the enforcement mechanisms were stripped out and the bill left about 30% in the wild west anyway so barring some miracle that'll roll craps.

Capital requirements so the banks don't leverage themselves into infinity? Fagetabouit

Blind derivatives? But of course. Gotz to have da ca$ino bayyyyyyybeeeeee Wanna make some money? Cool, more ya got the more you get.

A permanent leash on the Fed? Nope, a peek a boo only and that limited.
Wondering why Bernie voted for closure and passage? He'd already got his 30 pieces of silver, if he broke his deal he'd be cut off. His vote came at the price of this lil peek. This is the same as on the Wealthcare and Profit Protection Act, he got his clinics and he had to sell out.
Hell, I wish everybody had the integrity to always at least get a little taste for the people.

Consumer protections? Compromised, but of the of course. Might even be worthless but I guess it can't help but be no worse than now and maybe something will come of it.

Usury? Keeps on movin' can't stop.

Glass-Stegall? You mean that lame shit that keep us from crashing for generations? Too square, daddy-o.

We did get some reform on the ratings agencies which might slow them down a little.

They've set up an "early warning system" to supposedly get a handle on things quicker.

Some various window dressings to spruce up a little.

This is supposed to be the response two years in the making to the biggest economic debacle since the Depression? Historic? Put the pipe down and slowly walk away. It is historic and the most sweeping since the New Deal because the bastards put under some measure of control have spent every day since trying to undo it. A bill could have said "Try to do better" and pretty much win that title minus the clean up of the S&L crisis.

We ain't out of the woods by any stretch. This bill simply is woefully weak to prevent a similar crisis to what we are going through never mind cutting off any new shenanigans.

We simply cannot have a casino and too big too fail and even hope to have the investment and distribution of wealth or the incentives to make prudent choices a capitalist economy requires.
All the money is stuck up top and it ain't movin folks, anybody with a lick of sense can understand that.

[ej510]

27. Without glass steagall and complete allowing of the gambling this bill is shit.

[ima_sinnic]

32. ++++1 thanks for the dose of harsh reality

nevertheless, we will be hearing for months about another "Democratic success" and how we should be "pragmatic" and accept the crumbs that happen to fall off the table.

[NJmaverick]

40. Paul Krugman who has more than "a lick of sense" when it comes to these matters

doesn't agree with you in the least.

[TheKentuckian]

41. OHHH BULLSHIT. Krugman made no such agreement

Shoot him an email and see if he disagrees that we simply cannot have a casino and too big too fail and even hope to have the investment and distribution of wealth or the incentives to make prudent choices a capitalist economy requires.
Or that all the money is stuck up top and it ain't moving.

He may disagree with the amount of threat posed by too big too fail but I've never once heard him preach up the casino culture or make an argument that it diverts far too much capital from real investment.

Are you an engineer? It feels like I'm dealing with a familiar straight line/boil it down mindset. Never mind, scratch that, engineers are usually problem solvers even if not holistic thinkers. You like to "address" and spin more like an MBA.

[mkultra]

43. usual kentucky bullshit

read a fucking book.

[TheKentuckian]

46. Got a suggestion? Care to elaborate on what bullshit that I stated and explain

where I'm wrong?

I've read thousands of books and can state and defend my positions just as well as you.

Put up or shut up. Grace us with your insight.

[pnorman]

29. K & R!

n/t

[ima_sinnic]

33. kick

[freddie mertz]

34. K & R's for Cantwell and Feingold!

I wish more of their colleagues could have held out.

[Dr Morbius]

47. It is progress. Small progress, perhaps, but progress.

We've exited an era in which government refused to acknowledge the existence of problems and entered an era in which government puts Band-Aids on problems. Which is better than nothing.

Barack Obama can be seen, in a way, as the Band-Aid President. It seems like he's trying to address the problems faced by ordinary Americans, and he correctly sees that the problems are not few. He wants to address them all, one by one, and this is the second major reform he has implemented. Both HIR and Wall Street reform bills wound up being disappointing to those of us who wanted cures implemented, but both will help alleviate the problems. A little bit. Kinda like a Band-Aid.

Now, there are many who are angry about the Band-Aids when surgery is required. It makes it appear as though treatment is being applied but it clearly is not enough. But does one turn down a bandage when one is bleeding? No, one does not. One continues to insist on a real cure to healthcare insurance and to potentially crippling Wall Street shenanigans and by the way also to FISA; I have not forgotten. We take this bone, for we starve, but we continue to growl for real meat.

Let us all applaud the Democrats so: clap, clap, clap. Very good, ladies and gentlemen. Now (to President Obama and the Democrats in both Houses): back to work! When corporations pay for political advertisements they need to identify themselves in the ads, and foreign corporations need to keep out of our elections altogether. There's a bill in the works; let's get on it. No freaking parades for doing your jobs - poorly. We expect better. You want real applause? Do better.

This isn't historic legislation. It's necessary legislation, and inadequate at that. But yeah, we'll take it. Back to the drawing board, though; we won't be palliated by the legislation, and we won't be satisfied. Band-Aids don't knit broken bones. They fail to even address the pain suffered.