Literal Smoke Filled Backroom Deal For 2015 Budget Measure

Disgusting bill.. All goodies for Corporations and the wealthy. Nothing for the average American..

Citicorp actually wrote the part about letting Federally insured banks now gamble with our money.. and it leaves the taxpayers on the hook to bail them out!! yey!!


The campaign contributions allowed by corporations has gone up from $32,000 to $320,000!!!! NOW they can really buy the Pols and write their own ticket.. Yey!
 
The Kochs can buy more politicians with their billions. Bankers get rich off the good loans. Taxpayers bail them out on the bad loans. Terrible bill. Politicians from both sides of the aisle paid homage to their lobbyists, while flipping the bird at the taxpayers. Shameful, but not unexpected.
 

How many folks here have actually seen the bills and know what is actually in them? Mostly scrambled news where I live so no real news of what is going on in Washington DC. Items come and go as the debates continue on and on. Some outspoken in both major parties have taken stances against having the budget bill passed. So no way to just award loyalty to just one party for not liking the bill as it is. These budget efforts get way out of control by the way they are run. All budget bills should be on debated and budget controlled items only. As I understand it these efforts can get dumped on by any and all that want to open new founts for specific purposes, not debates, just slip it in and watch it ride the tide. Does not seem to be very well thought out to run this way for important central government needs. No matter which side a person may prefer.
 
Josiah09 said:
This bill is the first installment of the Republican pay back to their super rich supporters. Thank you Elizabeth Warren for at least trying to stop it.
Click to expand...

For those who missed it.. This woman is amazing.. Perhaps she SHOULD run for president..


Mr. President, I’m back on the floor to talk about a dangerous provision that was slipped into a must-pass spending bill at the last minute to benefit Wall Street. This provision would repeal a rule called, and I’m quoting the title of the rule, “PROHIBITION AGAINST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS OF SWAPS ENTITIES.”
Click to expand...
On Wednesday, I came to the floor to talk to Democrats, asking them to strip this provision out of the omnibus bill and protect taxpayers.
On Thursday, I came to the floor to talk to Republicans. Republicans say they don’t like bailouts either. So I asked them to vote the way they talk. If they don’t like bailouts, then they could take out this provision that puts taxpayers right back on the hook for bailing out big banks.
Today, I’m coming to the floor not to talk about Democrats or Republicans, but about a third group that also wields tremendous power in Washington: Citigroup.
Mr. President, in recent years, many Wall Street institutions have exerted extraordinary influence in Washington’s corridors of power, but Citigroup has risen above the others. Its grip over economic policymaking in the executive branch is unprecedented. Consider a few examples:

  • Three of the last four Treasury Secretaries under Democratic presidents have had close Citigroup ties. The fourth was offered the CEO position at Citigroup, but turned it down.
  • The Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve system is a Citigroup alum.
  • The Undersecretary for International Affairs at Treasury is a Citigroup alum.
  • The U.S. Trade Representative and the person nominated to be his deputy – who is currently an assistant secretary at Treasury – are Citigroup alums.
  • A recent chairman of the National Economic Council at the White House was a Citigroup alum.
  • Another recent Chairman of the Office of Management and Budget went to Citigroup immediately after leaving the White House.
  • Another recent Chairman of the Office of Management of Budget and Management is also a Citi alum -- but I’m double counting here because now he’s the Secretary of the Treasury.
That’s a lot of powerful people, all from one bank. But they aren’t Citigroup’s only source of power. Over the years, the company has spent millions of dollars on lobbying Congress and funding the political campaigns of its friends in the House and the Senate.
Citigroup has also spent millions trying to influence the political process in ways that are far more subtle—and hidden from public view. Last year, I wrote Citigroup and other big banks a letter asking them to disclose the amount of shareholder money they have been diverting to think tanks to influence public policy. Citigroup’s response to my letter? Stonewalling. A year has gone by, and Citigroup didn’t even acknowledge receiving the letter.
Citigroup has a lot of money, it spends a lot of money, and it uses that money to grow and consolidate a lot of power. And it pays off. Consider a couple facts.
Fact one: During the financial crisis, when all the support through TARP and from the FDIC and the Fed is added up, Citi received nearly half a trillion dollars in bailouts. That’s half a trillion with a “t.” That’s almost $140 billion more than the next biggest bank got.
Fact two: During Dodd-Frank, there was an amendment introduced by my colleague Senator Brown and Senator Kaufman that would have broken up Citigroup and the nation’s other largest banks. That amendment had bipartisan support, and it might have passed, but it ran into powerful opposition from an alliance between Wall Streeters on Wall Street and Wall Streeters who held powerful government jobs. They teamed up and blocked the move to break up the banks—and now Citi is bigger than ever.
The role that senior officials working in the Treasury department played in killing the amendment was not subtle: A senior Treasury official acknowledged it at the time in a background interview with New York Magazine. The official from Treasury said, and I’m quoting here, “If we’d been for it, it probably would have happened. But we weren’t, so it didn’t.” That’s power.
Mr. President, Democrats don’t like Wall Street bailouts. Republicans don’t like Wall Street bailouts. The American people are disgusted by Wall Street bailouts. And yet here we are -- five years after Dodd-Frank – with Congress on the verge of ramming through a provision that would do nothing for middle class, do nothing for community banks – do nothing but raise the risk that taxpayers will have to bail out the biggest banks once again.
There’s a lot of talk lately about how the Dodd-Frank Act isn’t perfect. There’s a lot of talk coming from Citigroup about how the Dodd-Frank Act isn’t perfect.
So let me say this to anyone who is listening at Citi: I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn’t perfect.
It should have broken you into pieces
Click to expand...
 
Jackie22 said:
Exactly, we need more like her.
Click to expand...

BUt unfortunately, its unlikely she would be able to get the financing needed to be elected.. Do you think wall street contributors will donate to her campaign? This is the problem... our government is bought and paid for by special interests.. How can we fix that?
 
"How can we fix that?"..........well, enough people have to be aware of those in our government that vote for and encourage these dealings of special interest......sadly, I don't expect this awareness to happen any time soon, just look at the last election.
 
Jackie22 said:
"How can we fix that?"..........well, enough people have to be aware of those in our government that vote for and encourage these dealings of special interest......sadly, I don't expect this awareness to happen any time soon, just look at the last election.
Click to expand...

I agree. Unfortunately so many do not even know the issues... They vote like they are cheering for a sports team to win... NOT who will represent their best interests. AND now we ALL will have to live with their unfortunate choices.
 
To have so many folks jump parties to get such a great lead in the coming years means that plenty have been unhappy with the way the Democrats have been running things for the last 8 years. Yes I said 8 years as the Democrats took over the Congress in Bush's last two years and started their mess then by running the debt from 7 trillions to in the 10 trillions before Obama even came on. Since then Obama has run our national debt from in the 10 trillions up to near the 18 trillion mark today. We still have 2 more years with Obama but maybe with a Republican Congress Obama will be more contained on his last two years.
 
BobF said:
To have so many folks jump parties to get such a great lead in the coming years means that plenty have been unhappy with the way the Democrats have been running things for the last 8 years. Yes I said 8 years as the Democrats took over the Congress in Bush's last two years and started their mess then by running the debt from 7 trillions to in the 10 trillions before Obama even came on. Since then Obama has run our national debt from in the 10 trillions up to near the 18 trillion mark today. We still have 2 more years with Obama but maybe with a Republican Congress Obama will be more contained on his last two years.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.
 
If you think Republicans will contain the debt... don't hold your breath.. ONLY they run it up by giving tax breaks to the wealthy and starting more wars.. THEN they claim to be trying to cut the deficit and contain spending by CUTTING benefits to the poor and middle class.... NEXT on the agenda.. cuts to Social Security and Medicare.. Don't get too comfy with your SS check... OR your ability to access healthcare with Medicare.. You will be out trying to buy it with a voucher and being denied for any pre-existing condition. That's what you voted for... lol!
 
You may be right, but at least we will have a government that will likely follow the wishes of the voters and not just do massive bankruptcy actions like the current government has done for 8 years now. The 2 years of Bush's term when the Democrats took over and the last 6 years of Obama's term where far too little was done from Congress and far too much just from some groups Obama formed to drive his idea of how we should live without using the Congress for discussions, new laws, and votes from the representatives of the people, our Congress. This Obama care came to be after a nearly failed vote in Congress where after holding the vote open for some time, some of the Democrats in the Congress that had indicated voting no were convinced to change their vote to approve Obama care to win the vote late in the evening. Obama care barely made it when it got started and it appears now that there are plenty of votes available to change how Obama care will operate and how lots of parts of Obama care might get returned to private care.

At least the Republicans do try to get things run through our Congress which means that both sides of the political battle get heard and vote on things. Something seldom happening under the current Obama government that even refuses to have the Democrat part of the government to have chances to help vote for or against many of these expenses that seem to be eating up our money. How can you blame the Republicans for spending so much money when it only happens when Democrats take over the Congress? One exception was Bill Clinton with a Republican Congress. He managed to end his term with less debt than when he started.

We really should get our Congress to operate as designed and no longer just be under the control of political parties. Congress needs to get back to the Constitution ways of having representatives of districts, not political parties, gather to determine ideas about how the US will be run. The current political parties do not seem to be willing to work together to bring the peoples wishes to be our new laws of joint and debated wishes of all.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top