Question by gws35: If Phil Gramm was so bad for the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley act, why are the Democrats doing the same thing now?
While our attention was being diverted by the health care reform commotion, the Democrats in Congress have been back to forming bipartisan deals like the one that led to the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley banking deregulation act, which repealed the Depression era Glass-Steagal act and led directly to the financial meltdown of 2008.
They want to extend the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley banking deregulation act for the rest of the financial sector. They decided that banking deregulation was so successful at melting down the banks, they want to melt down the rest of the financial sector the same way.
I believe this legislation is being called “Bring Back the Depression – Part Deux:”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091211/ap_on_bi_ge/us_financial_overhaul
House eases restrictions on derivatives trades
“A bipartisan coalition in the House voted late Thursday to make it easier for corporations to engage in complex derivatives trades without government restrictions, eroding the reach of proposed regulations to govern Wall Street.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091211/ap_on_bi_ge/us_financial_overhaul
House scales back proposed Wall Street rules
“nearly half the Democrats teamed up with Republicans late Thursday to loosen restrictions on derivatives and reject tougher regulations…
“The legislation still imposes restrictions on derivatives, aiming to prevent manipulation in and bring transparency to a 0 trillion global market. An amendment by New York Democrat Scott Murphy, adopted 304-124 Thursday night, exempted businesses that trade in derivatives, not as financial speculators, but to hedge against market fluctuations such as currency rates or gasoline prices. The amendment also provided an exception for businesses that are not considered too big to be a risk to the financial system.
“A Democratic effort to make more companies subject to derivatives regulation failed 279-150.
“On Wednesday, pro-business Democrats succeeded in making it harder for states to enforce their own consumer protection rules on national banks. Under a compromise struck with Democratic leaders and Treasury officials, states would not be able to pre-empt federal consumer laws if the state law “materially” interferes with the business of banks.
“The bill is H.R.4173″
Best answer:
Answer by nonya
because they can
Give your answer to this question below!
