Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Consumer Protection Agency in Doubt

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-15-10 08:54 AM
Original message
Consumer Protection Agency in Doubt
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd is considering scrapping the idea of creating a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, people familiar with the matter said, an initiative at the heart of the White House's proposal to revamp financial-sector regulations.

The Connecticut Democrat, who announced this month that he wouldn't run for re-election this year, has discussed the possibility of abandoning the push for a new agency during negotiations with key Senate Republicans as a way to secure a bipartisan deal on the legislation, these people said.


Sen. Christopher Dodd on Jan. 6, announcing he wouldn't seek re-election
Mr. Dodd's offer is conditional, however: Republicans must agree to create a beefed-up consumer-protection division within another federal agency, these people said.

The apparent willingness to forgo an independent consumer-protection agency would be a major concession for Mr. Dodd, who had blasted the banking industry for lobbying aggressively to prevent the creation of such an entity. "The very people who created the damn mess are the ones now arguing that consumers ought not to be protected," he said in June.

Mr. Dodd's shift comes amid a new sense of urgency to enact revamped rules governing the financial sector in what is now a narrow window before the November election.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704363504575003360632239020.html

The article goes on to say Dodd is having to find some compromise with Republicans because Democratic senators Tim Johnson and Mark Warner have 'raised concerns.' Johnson is a scumbag in the pocket of the banking industry who may wind up with the chairmanship of this committee with Dodd's retirement. We need to end the filibuster now!!! There will be no progress until we do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
shopgreen Donating Member (190 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-15-10 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
1. So Dodd is leaving us a shit present on his way out!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-15-10 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Hard to say
Tim Johnson is a banker fellating scumbag who opposes any real reform and Dodd is having to court Shelby of Alabama who will support some reform but sees the consumer protection piece as 'nanny state.' So, I'm not sure this is on Dodd but, rather, the guy next in line to head this committee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-15-10 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
3. Mark Warner is the absolute epitome of DLC.
And I have to say as a Virginian that his tenure as governor was not all that. Virginia pretty much runs itself. His one big legacy deal was for some big computer modernization thing for state government that just as you would expect is way over budget and incomplete as we speak.

I see him as the Dan Quayle of the Democrats, especially when there was VP talk about him. Nice suit and hair. Velveeta. Bland, boring, acceptable to most, successful businessman, blah blah blah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-15-10 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Dan Quayle of the Democrats. Apt! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-15-10 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
4. I actually think it may be better if it's housed in another agency.
That way it's less likely for the SEC/FTC to withhold information from the new agency, and they could possibly act as an internal policing arm of those agencies (they really need one).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC