John Carney on why he voted to weaken Dodd-Frank (annotated)
I found this early draft of Carney’s HR 37 statement on line.
“Many of you have asked me why I voted for H.R. 37, featured in the News Journal this morning. Dodd-Frank was passed before I came to Congress, but I support its goal of reining in Wall Street and protecting taxpayers.[Please note that “support” should be enclosed in quotation marks]
I’ve voted many times to defend the law and make it better [for banks}, and I’ve voted against many attempts to undermine it since coming to Congress in 2011. HR 37 was not an attempt to undermine Dodd-Frank […according to the lobbyists I’ve spoken with]. The provisions in this bill have passed Congress overwhelmingly in years past [and so have resolutions supporting flag day]. Unfortunately, it has recently become distorted and characterized for political purposes. [This is discouraging, because that the intent of he bill was to make changes for FINANCIAL purposes. To be specific, to provide FDIC coverage to banks for the very types of loans that precipitated the financial crisis.]
The reality is that this bill makes small, reasonable changes to one of the largest and most complex laws on our books. […in order to shield bank losses on bad bets and transfer that those expenses to you – the taxpayer.}
In order to make sure Dodd-Frank is implemented properly,[“that is to say, for the benefit of the banks”] …and that taxpayers are protected, we have to be willing to make responsible revisions to the law.[Especially changes like this one, drafted by banking lobbyist.]
I’ll continue to stand firm in supporting [profitable] improvements to financial regulations that will protect consumers [banks] and help businesses create jobs.”
I have no doubt that somehow this has brought more jobs to delaware. So IN. YOUR. FACE!
With all due respect, this post is lazy and dogmatic. At least respond to the evidence the man puts online. I was actually refreshed that a politician put down some facts associated with their typically hollow claims. Not sure what to believe but at least he’s showing us some evidence that this vote wasn’t as bad as it’s been portrayed.
F that corporate sell out pig. He’s working against the interests of the economy, the middle class and our kids future. The only difference between and a vile republican is the rhetoric
If the post is lazy and dogmatic, that certifies its authenticity.
“At least respond to the evidence the man puts online.”
What “evidence”? This was a “who me?” statement with zero substance.
Fact:
Collateralized loan obligations are the instruments that tanked the economy. John Carney voted in lockstep with his GOP brothers to give banks an extra two years of FDIC protection so that you – the taxpayer – will cover any losses while the banks pocket all the gains. There’s a fact for you.
One more thing, Carney’s whole statement is a poorly redrafted GOP talking points memo. He is either an idiot, or he trusts idiots in his employ.
This sentence: “The provisions in this bill have passed Congress overwhelmingly in years past.” is a direct pickup from the ranking Republican’s statement. Pure plagiarism.
I so hope the NJ follows up on this in a way that make the worm squirm
I’m just saying that the link i clicked provides votes that seem pretty bipartisan. you can pick apart his statement all you want, but if these votes were in fact like 420-0 then how can this be a complete gutting of Dodd frank? at least look at the facts he’s presenting with an open mind.
this was the link i saw
http://johncarney.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=630&Itemid=50
There’s no evidence in that link — just a list of bills that passed House votes and Committee votes. That’s basically a whine that other people are reconsidering their positions. And with good reason, too:
After what we have just lived through and are still recovering from, we need legislators who will fiercely protect the risks to taxpayers from bank and investment operations. There was little about this bill that did that, bipartisan or no.
You know what they hate the the most? When people actually pay attention to what is going on and voice opposition..
Yves Smith over at Naked Capitalism also is writing about HR 37, but you should scroll down to the comments at this link. Someone going by the name of Peter Pan has posted a response from one of Carney’s counterparts — and you can see the clearly coordinated talking points in defense of this bill.
That Team Carney could not concoct their own defense for this vote speaks volumes.