Special offer

GOP Falsely Claims Reg Reform Bill Creates A ‘Permanent Bailout Fund’ Paid For By Taxpayers

By
Real Estate Agent

 

 Evidently some republicans have a problem with the proposal to implement a "too big to fail" tax on financial giants, which would build a fund that would be tapped in the event that a large financial institution fails and needs to be unwound.

This fund (officially known as the Systemic Dissolution Fund) is meant to ensure that taxpayers stay out of the bailout business.

Republicans though, made it clear on the House floor that their opposition will be based on calling the fund "permanent TARP" and a "permanent bailout fund," while falsely claiming that taxpayers and non-financial companies will have to pay for it. Watch a compilation:

Unless the "schoolteachers in Mesquite, Texas" that Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) referenced have more than $50 billion in assets and have taken to hawking credit default swaps in the cafeteria, this tax will not affect them. And as far as the levy hitting "small businesses," unless Goldman Sachs is now a small business in the eyes of the GOP, there is no truth to this.

Instead of enshrining bailouts, the bill quite clearly stipulates on page 397 that the dissolution fund can only be used "to facilitate and provide for the orderly and complete dissolution of any failed financial company or companies that pose a systemic threat to the financial markets or economy.

 As Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) said on the floor in response to the GOP's rhetoric, "there is no bailout. As much as my friends on the other side of the aisle would like to be on message and continue to repeat that, there is no bailout." Though they dress it up in populist language, the GOP is endorsing the regulatory approach that led to AIG's repeated infusions of taxpayer money and the market shock that was felt in the wake of Lehman Brothers' collapse. But what more should we expect from the party that is huddling with financial services lobbyists to decide how to best kill regulatory reform?

 

Open Congress Summary

This is comprehensive legislation to overhaul regulations in the financial sector. It would establish a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency to regulate products like home mortgages, car loans and credit cards, give the Treasury Department new authority to place non-bank financial firms, like insurance companies into receivership and regulate the over-the-counter derivatives market.

 A two-page summary from the House Financial Services Committee can be downloaded here.

Posted by

 

Comments(2)

Terry Haugen STAGE it RIGHT! 321-956-2495
Stage it Right! - Melbourne, FL

Samo samo obstructionism Linda Mae.  The republicans are out for blood and they aren't going to stop till they get it!

Dec 14, 2009 07:16 AM
Anonymous
Georgia

Hey Linda Mae.  Where to begin??  Let's start with scripture.

Revelation 13:16 says "And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads"

Scripture points to CONTROL of all banks and money before forcing or tricking people to get the mark.  

Don't care about that aspect?  What about so much debt our Nation goes under?

According to the CBO, this takeover of the banks would cost us dearly!

 "This bill would increase direct spending by $9.4 billion over that 10-year period. In total, CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would increase budget deficits by $10.7 billion over the 2010-2014 period."

Additionally, MUCH of the situation we are in today was CAUSED BY THE GOVERNMENT when they fueled the subprime bubble.  

Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves. 

Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.

It was a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit.

Last point.  When ANY politician tells you that a fee or tax leveled on a business will not affect the consumer, *know* he is lying out his arse!  Business NEVER "eat" the hikes from Washington.  They pass them along to the consumer.

Dec 14, 2009 02:26 PM
#2