The point that I am surprised that the bill, given the Congress we have and the political influence of the banks, is as good, relatively speaking, as it is, didn’t seem to me to be a very controversial one. But I got challenged on it and spent most of my time on Dylan Ratigan’s MSNBC show defending that narrow point. It’s entirely possible that those good pieces get scrubbed in conference, and that was where I was heading before Mr. Ratigan sought clarification. That wasn’t really the point I wanted to make.
But I did learn something from today’s program, outside of the fact that I really have to iron this shirt: at one point they threw a caption up that said “Pelosi wants to start conference June 8.” I hadn’t heard that before, and I can’t find anything on the Google about it. But it makes sense, as the House and Senate have a lot to do next week, and then they have a district work period the following week; June 8 would basically be the first day back, though informal talks could happen between now and then.
Now, what’s happening on June 8? It’s the day of Blanche Lincoln’s primary runoff against Bill Halter. So if the conference doesn’t start until that day, she can claim all she wants that her “tough” derivatives title “will pass,” contrary to the belief of pretty much everyone following the issue.
Pretty sneaky, Congress.
(Oh, and it’s Dayen. Five letters. Most misspelled short surname in the English language.)
UPDATE: This is somewhat related. Here’s a story about the Masters of the Universe and their fear that Congress hasn’t killed something that would marginally affect their bottom line yet.
Wall Street banks, surprised that the Senate’s financial overhaul passed with language that could curtail their derivatives trading, are now hoping the rule can be killed in Congressional negotiations.
Lawmakers have been telling Wall Street the Senate provision would fail, “but it passed, so people are nervous,” said Paul Miller, analyst at FBR Capital Markets in Arlington, Virginia. “The problem is that everybody in Congress wants it out, but nobody wants the responsibility of taking it out.”
At least not until after June 8. But everyone is openly talking about when and how, not if, section 716 gets killed.
Raj Date is awesome, by the way:
The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, which represents JPMorgan and other large derivatives dealers, estimated the provision would require banks to find as much as $250 billion in new capital for the subsidiaries.
“It’s hard for me to come up with what’s a worse argument than that,” Date said. “That’s tantamount to saying, ‘Well, we’re undercapitalized today and we prefer to remain undercapitalized, thank you.”
I am completely unsympathetic to the argument that the banks would have to properly capitalize themselves. Better they find their own money rather than get subsidized by taxpayers – through FDIC depositor insurance, through the Fed discount window, etc.




22 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Dylan just tweeted this Bloomberg article…
“Pretty sneaky, Congress”; not anymore, you’ve busted them on the Lincoln manipulations.
Wish it could make it into the CMM somehow.
Obama has been in office about 16 month and my take on his Administration and Congressional Democrats can be summed by two phrases, cui bono and Three-card Monte. Three-card Monte is used to distract or hide what is the final bill or policy result from the public and cui bono for what individual, corporation, Congressman, President or councilor profits from same. I know it’s politics as normal; I’m just sick of it.
Change you could hope and for vote for but not get.
Appreciate your effort on this cataclysmic event David. Thank You
Neat! I would imagine being on that show would be surreal. We’ll see how the bill shapes up – the more nervous the bankers are, the better.
will fdl do a “save 716″ petition? i think it would be great.
aw, dday yer cute .. (btw i also respect your reporting :)
yeah Ratigan seemed to be channeling Gary Null (the natural healing guy who asks his radio guests questions in the form of twenty-minute speeches)
I’m sure you’ll be asked back, if only because Dylan now sees you as a good punching bag for your ‘view’ the bill is good. That will be great, since you’ll have a chance to tack to his left, and also correct Josh’s incorrect understanding of conference proceedings.
And you’ll have a chance to smile more, too! *g*
Well done, sir. Too bad about such a confusing name! Perhaps you could change it to something easier for media types to master, like Blagovich or Ceacescu?
Ratigan talks too much, asks a long-winded question, and then interrupts the answer. And the crap they lay over and insert beside the picture is annoying and distracting.
Your shirt looked fine, btw. Wish you had been able to talk more and actually explain.
Dylan should have given Dday as much time as he gave the other guests, though I think important points were made by all.
Dave if this is your first time you were great. Clear for the time you had “dribs and drabs”
I think I saw the first time Jane was on Washington Journal she has come a long way in her ability to be direct, clear and on target. Sure it must be tough to stay calm when you are staring down a camera that millions are going to be watching.
Thanks for all you do to help us understand these critical issues
Josh
“captured government”
next time
Great job DDay.
Good to see you up there with firedoglake underneath.
IMHO the toughest straddle is keeping it accessible, while at the same time keeping it interesting enough to satisfy Dylan’s producers. After his stint at CNBC, aka CNBS, Ratigan is really strong on this.
Hopefully, the first of many more appearances.
That was a good video, glad to see you were included. Thank you for beating the drums.
Who is Raj Date? (no link)
Good job! Nice to see you there. That must be challenging to respond quickly, concisely and well under those circumstances. Keep it up. I really benefit from reading your blogs, and I think you made some good points on this show with something very important.
David,
Don’t beat yourself up. You did fine. There’s a learning curve involved in learning to speak soundbite.
Of course, you must realize that we’re going to have to kill you, if you wear a bow tie, no matter what you say. /s
Excellent piece, D-Day. I wish Ratigan would have let you speak longer, however. I like Tavakoli’s strong assertion that Congress is “captured.” That point needs to be repeated ad nauseam, to mind-numbing excess, and across the political spectrum. Might it have some effect? I dunno, but it certainly can’t hurt anything, either.
Dayden? Seriously? That’s sloppy.
Good show, David.
Always a pleasant surprise to find sensible people alongside Pump and Dumpers.
Great Job David! I would have had trouble just understanding Dylan’s question and would have used up my allotted time asking for clarification.
Book Salon up at the Mothership with Derek Bok’s The Politics of Happiness: What Government Can Learn from the New Research on Well-Being hosted by Sara Robinson
Great piece and awesome first appearance on the teevee, Mr. Dayden!
Some further comments in the words of folks more eloquent than I:
1) Re banksters’ complaints of having to gamble with their own money and actually take the risk of “being in business” by Sean Paul Kelley in “Naked Shorts”
2) Re “the Market” as a rigged “creature” of the bankster-and-friends’ manipulations by Tyler Durden in “Stocks Freak Out Again: 130 Point Move In Dow In 15 Minutes On No Volume”
DDay, the shirt was fine.
I always find Josh Rosen has info that’s enlightening, and I respect Ratigan’s ability to synthesize extremely complex info; I think people are born with that gift. It’s not teachable.
Given the deeply systemic problems in our system, it’s my view that the recent Congressional efforts are about ‘as useless as tits on a boar hog’.
To me, a key feature of this whole ‘story’ is the depth and extent to which both Congress and the Exec branch (regulator agencies) have been captured. However, it’s my view that our SCOTUS majority is also captured: talk about people who do zero entreprenurial work, telling the rest of us how the economic rules should be organized (!). Give me strength…!
I understood your point: given the degree to which Congress has been captured, it’s a miracle they did anything at all. However, to me the more interesting question is: HOW do the Congressional rules — secret holds, the filibuster, seniority in committees — need to be revised so that we can at least restore some hope of functionality in the system.
How do we get better economic rules?
We need better legislators, judges, and exec level employees.
How do we get better legislation…?
First, deal with campaign finance.
But second, deal with Congressional rules.
Why aren’t the rules of the Senate — the filibuster, the secret hold, etc — front and center in more Congressional races?!
I guess that’s a topic that I hope you’ll address in future segments: not simply HOW lame-ass Congress is, but what rules they’d have to fix in order to be more accountable.