MonteIrvin
Member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2010
- Messages
- 17
It's the biggest, most far-reaching piece of legislation that the Senate will tackle this summer and its the capstone of Chris Dodd's long career.
So what do the candidates vying to replace Dodd think of the financial reform bill? And how would they vote on the measure?
A quick survey revealed one emphatic "no" (Peter Schiff), one "no" (Linda McMahon) and one qualified "yes" (Dick Blumenthal.)
Below are the views of the candidates, via their campaign staffs.
Schiff: "The financial reform bill is Washington theatrics at its worst. Not only does the bill completely ignore the root causes of the 2008 financial crises (artificially low interest rates provided by the Fed and government guaranteed mortgages) but it helps ensure that the next financial crises will be even worse.
"More regulations will only exacerbate the moral hazards and credit misallocations that produced the last financial crisis and will lay the foundation for an even larger one to come. Instead of reigning in the Fed, this bill gives it even more power to inflict even more harm on our economy. Government created monstrosities Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac, the two largest systemic risk originators, are left unchecked and the harm they are doing to our economy is even greater now then before the crisis their reckless actions helped engender.
"To add insult to injury, instead of admitting that its decision to bailout out Wall Street was a mistake, this bill now enshrines a mechanism for future bailouts into law. Unfortunately, rather then learning from its mistakes, Congress simply repeats them on larger scales."
McMahon: "Linda supports financial reform,'' her spokesman Ed Patru said. "She believes the goals of this particular legislation are laudable and certain aspects of it are reasonable (i.e. audit of the Fed, minimum underwriting standards, and the skin-in-the-game requirement for securitization); however, she's disappointed that it continues the 'too big to fail' culture, that it fails to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that it grows government. She's also skeptical about installing a new regulator that will have no more foresight than those regulators who failed us in the past.
"Every Connecticut voter ought to be troubled by the fact that this 2,300-page bill is being passed by lawmakers who can't seem to explain the ramifications of the legislation. Chris Dodd said recently, 'No one will know until this is actually in place how it works.' This comes just a few months after Congress passed a massive healthcare bill that hardly anyone read. Nancy Pelosi said about that bill, just before it passed, 'But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it.'
Linda believes lawmakers need to read bills and fully understand them before they vote on them - particularly when those bills are thousands of pages long and cost tens of billions of dollars."
So is that a "yes" or a "no" vote? " She believes financial regulatory reform needs to be bipartisan and it must protect both consumers and taxpayers. The legislation as it currently stands doesn't go far enough,'' Patru said. "She cannot support the bill that came out of conference because it doesn't go far enough."
Blumenthal: "I would support this measure as a good, clearly and urgently needed first step toward stopping the Wall Street abuses and reckless risk-taking that helped bring our nation to the brink of economic catastrophe and put millions of people out of work. Even stronger measures are needed in key areas like reforming the credit rating agencies and assuring strong independent protection for consumers in the new agency that will be created. If elected, I will fight for new laws and rules that achieve these goals, and make sure that the system is made more accountable and fair for ordinary people and small businesses."
http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/2010/07/where-do-the-us-senate-candida.html#more
So what do the candidates vying to replace Dodd think of the financial reform bill? And how would they vote on the measure?
A quick survey revealed one emphatic "no" (Peter Schiff), one "no" (Linda McMahon) and one qualified "yes" (Dick Blumenthal.)
Below are the views of the candidates, via their campaign staffs.
Schiff: "The financial reform bill is Washington theatrics at its worst. Not only does the bill completely ignore the root causes of the 2008 financial crises (artificially low interest rates provided by the Fed and government guaranteed mortgages) but it helps ensure that the next financial crises will be even worse.
"More regulations will only exacerbate the moral hazards and credit misallocations that produced the last financial crisis and will lay the foundation for an even larger one to come. Instead of reigning in the Fed, this bill gives it even more power to inflict even more harm on our economy. Government created monstrosities Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac, the two largest systemic risk originators, are left unchecked and the harm they are doing to our economy is even greater now then before the crisis their reckless actions helped engender.
"To add insult to injury, instead of admitting that its decision to bailout out Wall Street was a mistake, this bill now enshrines a mechanism for future bailouts into law. Unfortunately, rather then learning from its mistakes, Congress simply repeats them on larger scales."
McMahon: "Linda supports financial reform,'' her spokesman Ed Patru said. "She believes the goals of this particular legislation are laudable and certain aspects of it are reasonable (i.e. audit of the Fed, minimum underwriting standards, and the skin-in-the-game requirement for securitization); however, she's disappointed that it continues the 'too big to fail' culture, that it fails to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that it grows government. She's also skeptical about installing a new regulator that will have no more foresight than those regulators who failed us in the past.
"Every Connecticut voter ought to be troubled by the fact that this 2,300-page bill is being passed by lawmakers who can't seem to explain the ramifications of the legislation. Chris Dodd said recently, 'No one will know until this is actually in place how it works.' This comes just a few months after Congress passed a massive healthcare bill that hardly anyone read. Nancy Pelosi said about that bill, just before it passed, 'But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it.'
Linda believes lawmakers need to read bills and fully understand them before they vote on them - particularly when those bills are thousands of pages long and cost tens of billions of dollars."
So is that a "yes" or a "no" vote? " She believes financial regulatory reform needs to be bipartisan and it must protect both consumers and taxpayers. The legislation as it currently stands doesn't go far enough,'' Patru said. "She cannot support the bill that came out of conference because it doesn't go far enough."
Blumenthal: "I would support this measure as a good, clearly and urgently needed first step toward stopping the Wall Street abuses and reckless risk-taking that helped bring our nation to the brink of economic catastrophe and put millions of people out of work. Even stronger measures are needed in key areas like reforming the credit rating agencies and assuring strong independent protection for consumers in the new agency that will be created. If elected, I will fight for new laws and rules that achieve these goals, and make sure that the system is made more accountable and fair for ordinary people and small businesses."
http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/2010/07/where-do-the-us-senate-candida.html#more
