Before last night’s debate, Jeff Connaughton, former chief of staff to Senator Ted Kaufman and longtime aide to Joe Biden and President Clinton, offered some advice to Mitt Romney. He thought Romney should go after Barack Obama’s biggest weakness: the failure to prosecute Wall Street crimes.
In actuality, Romney only submitted a glancing blow with respect to Wall Street, claiming that the Dodd-Frank financial reform law “designates a number of banks as too big to fail, and they’re effectively guaranteed by the federal government… There’ve been 122 community and small banks have closed since Dodd- Frank.” I believe he’s talking about the designation of a systemically important financial institution (SIFI), and that’s not really a designation of too big to fail, but a designation that forces the institutions to write up living wills and hold more capital. And it’s not just five banks, but insurance companies like AIG and others who have been hit with the SIFI label, which leads to more regulation rather than less. I don’t think it changes the dynamic of too big to fail – the systemic risk council can still proceed with bailouts, though they supposedly have “more tools” to wind down failing firms – but the SIFI label really has nothing to do with what Romney was saying.
However, the lack of discussion about the financial crisis, and the crimes committed, and the lack of accountability was palpable. Connaughton’s advice wasn’t taken. And that puts him in a familiar position. For two years, Connaughton worked in the Senate trying to force the political class into getting to work on reforming the banks and singling out the wrongdoers. And he ran into a brick wall. Or rather, “the blob,” the mass of consultants and lobbyists and fundraisers and hangers-on that envelop policymakers and narrow what they consider to be their alternatives. “When it comes to Wall Street, we don’t have a two-party system. We have an ongoing Wall Street contribution party,” Connaughton told me in an interview yesterday about his book, The Payoff: Why Wall Street Always Wins. He has a particular insight into this, having spent his career on both Wall Street and Capitol Hill, having worked as a lobbyist and a fundraiser and a White House lawyer before making one last-ditch effort to reform the system as chief of staff to Sen. Kaufman.
Below is an edited transcript of our conversation, which covered financial reform, money in politics, and the insidious grip of Big Money over Washington.
….
FDL News: Tell me what takeaway you want people to get from your book The Payoff.
Jeff Connaughton: Let me start with the main reason I wrote it and work my way back to your question: I was furious at the Justice Department. You want to trust these people, I had known them all for years. But by the end of our two years, you had to recognize that they misled and gamed us the whole way. You can call lobbyists any name you want, I am a lawyer, I worked in the White House. I’m not stupid. The Justice Department was either so inept or so in the tank, I just thought I’m going to call them on it. And then at that point I might as well do something on SEC and Senate.
That was the anger, the spark. And then Occupy came along, this is the same anger that motivated me. Everyone gave Obama benefit of the doubt, then within a couple years people were occupying public spaces. The book has a major chord and minor chord. The major chord is Ted’s term in office. We decided we would go after three major things: the prosecution of Wall Street crimes from the Justice Department, the structural problems in the financial system like high frequency trading, and then too big to fail. And it’s now a cliche to say it, but I felt cognitive dissonance. Why aren’t people seeing things the same way Ted and I are? It seemed obvious to us. If you want to prevent the next crisis, you had to stand up to the Fed and the Treasury, and break up the banks.
FDL News: And yet you saw all this resistance.
Connaughton: I felt like the system is not responding the way it should. Not that I was naive. I even say in the book I should have known more than everybody. But I thought you had enough of a regulatory system that we shouldn’t have had the blatant fraud that we did. And once the scales dropped from my eyes, it so shocked me conscience, I couldn’t go back and be part of the system. Ted said to me after we got out of the Senate, hey let’s start a not-for-profit and work on reform. I said, we’ve just had our Pogo moment, I don’t know if anyone remembers Pogo, but it was, “we have met the enemy and it is us!”
I said, Ted, haven’t we known the Vice President for 70 years put together? I don’t want to write an op-ed, call Joe Biden and get me to do something about it!
It took the failure of government to respond to this crisis to realize that over the course of my career in DC, that I had been an eyewitness to how Wall Street and Washington are just so close together. Neither party is willing to do anything about investigating Wall Street. And I said this at a talk in New York, and he said to me, “not only are you right, but everyone in New York knows you’re right!” I didn’t think I lived in that kind of America.
FDL News: So why do you think it is? I always go back and forth on this. Is it that there’s so much money in the system, and everyone just wants to get paid to advance their career? Or is it a mindset, where everybody around the policymakers just rubs off on them?
Connaughton: It’s both. When I first started working for Joe Biden in 1987, trial lawyers, the Nader public interest types and unions, that was the Democratic camp. That was a countervailing force in Washington. And then Nader said in 1996 we have two corporate political parties, and I didn’t believe him at the time, I was working in the White House. Now I think Nader’s right. It’s incredible how much money and power have grown in DC in my 20 years. And when the benefits explode, and the norms and ethics erode, people start making different rational choices.
The other thing you say is part of what I call the Blob. The Blob is made up of the people who continuously surround Treasury, the SEC, the Banking Committee, Wall Street. They’re the financial technocrats. I talked to Eliot Spitzer before going on his show the other day, he said it was the social glue of Washington. I mean, I’ve known Lanny Breuer for 10 years, at first it was hard to criticize him in print! The public interest has become so outgunned that the only people you hear from in Washington, I mean somebody quantified this, 95% submitting comments about the Volcker rule to federal agencies were Wall Street people.
It’s about money, power, mindshare. You can now make big money in Washington. People have kneed me in the ribs because I made money as a lobbyist. But look at the consequences of deciding to step outside the establishment. For me, I was thinking about this, maybe I’ll enjoy being a local trial lawyer. I don’t think I can ever again come back to Washington. And people have to make that choice, and rationally, they say, it’s time to go make some money.
FDL News: It’s like the way the MEK got themselves taken off the State Department’s terror list, they just hired a bunch of Washington hands, Tom Ridge, Ed Rendell, and threw all kinds of money at them, and there they go, off the list.
Connaughton: Somebody called me up the day that Tim Pawlenty was put in charge of the Financial Services Roundtable, and they said to me, “It’s like the perfect coda to your book.” Look at Evan Bayh, he goes out the door writing this high-minded op-ed. And then he cashes in. At our caucus meetings, Bayh would sit by himself at tables. He never interacted with anyone. And when you look at speeches on the floor, of course Ted gave more than everyone, his last two years Bayh gave like 2 speeches. Pawlenty and Bayh are perfect examples. Pawlenty was almost Vice President, Bayh was almost Vice President. You get as far as you can go in the political game, and then you say screw it, I’ll be comfortable. And there’s Tom Daschle showing them all how it’s done.
When you become someone with substantial authority in government, you can test drive Porsches in your final days in office.
FDL News: What would you say about the failure to prosecute? Is this just a big coverup?
Connaughton: I go back to that speech Eric Holder just gave at Columbia. He tallied up 2,000 prosecutions for mortgage fraud and said that the Department’s record “has been nothing less than historic.” He’s talking about peons. This just avoids the central question, the one we asked all the time. “Did the Justice Department organize a timely, purposeful, concerted investigation of Wall Street executives?” And the answer is just no. Obama admitted the answer was no when he put together the second task force.
Lanny Breuer told us in 2009 that he’s dependent on the pipeline to bring him cases. I couldn’t believe it. Totally passive, he’s just waiting for the cases to materialize. And then we started calling the US Attorneys in November 2009, they said they just heard from Justice, asking around, right after we talked to them. It’s just like the CEOs of a listing bank, covering everything up with lies. I’m very outraged by it.
FDL News: My impression is that you don’t see any answers to this.
Connaughton: No, I mean, before I wrote the end of the book, I rewatched Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. He didn’t just go back to Montana or whatever, he stayed and fought. In my epilogue, I did lay out, here are my suggested reforms. Ban lobbyists for being bundlers. Put together a full movement. The non-financial part of corporate America needs to realize we need financial stability. Some other stuff. I don’t totally remember (laughter).
FDL News: Like I said, it seems like you have a much better handle on the problem than the solution.
Connaughton: Obama had an opportunity to work on this when the banks were weak after the financial crisis. But I don’t know, after Citizens United, how do you really get money out of politics? We do have this perpetual money machine and I don’t know how to put it in reverse. Ted and I said, it’s probably going to take another financial crisis, and another Teddy Roosevelt or FDR coming along. Simon Johnson, when we were working with him, said it’s the beginning of a 10-year reform movement. You work every day, and we’re starting to see some interest on breaking up the banks. It’s like, red rover, red rover, send Sandy Weill over.
But there are no easy answers, because it has become so deeply cultural in Washington. People have just compartmentalized the financial crisis away from Obama versus Romney, and that’s what both parties want. It’s not a part of the national conversation right now. We’re in this tribal period. And the persuadables are not being targeted by either party on these issues because they want to raise money from Wall Street.





13 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Allow me to posit something so elemental it is almost always overlooked. We as a society must de-glorify (is that a word?) grotesque wealth. We must take obscene wealth from a position of glorification to one of shame. Greed is bad. As long as the culture glorifies those who secure obscene wealth there is no downside to it. I am not suggesting that this alone will be sufficient but I believe it will be nearly impossible to enact any meaningful constraints or controls in the absence of a sea-change in the cultural zeitgeist. Greed is bad. Obscene wealth is obscene. Shame is a powerful weapon and we must use it.
Y’all were conned. “Greed is good” was a grand comprador mask for class pillage. Of course greed is not good.
Go ahead, tell me how greed properly managed is good.
A-merkins are hopeless.
We’ve been this way before, we just have to remember that no one is going to do it for us.
but, but, but……COMMUNISM! without greed and grotesque wealth, we have….COMMUNISM!!! yeah, what ludwig said, hopeless.
What, after two years of combat he couldn’t tell the difference? Pitiful.
No more land for the New World, comrade.
Huff ‘n Puff’s not enuff.
This joker should drop the politesse.
Thanks for the interview. And as I note with lots of books. They are good a lying out the problem but not so good at solutions. Maybe it’s because they still see themselves as “one of the them” These are his buddies, it’s hard to even write about them. What if his solution is. “Let’s set up a system where people can sue WS in conjunction with the DOJ as kind of a Qui Tam suit and they get 15 percent. This would open up the flood gates of insider whistle blowers.
What is needed is leverage and something that the WS people are afraid of. Also, so many times people think about prosecution of crime for financial fraud as the only option, their are other crimes that were committed that they didn’t rewrite the laws to be no longer illegal. THAT can be part of the method. It’s the old, “put Al Capone in jail for not paying his taxes.”
But again, this would require the people to identify people and organizations and then LOOK for other crimes because you know you can’t get them on financial fraud. And if you do that then they will whine, “It’s a witch hunt!” but if they can get busted for insider trading or sexually harassing of staff, we can at least send a message. “If they think they are above the law in one area they probably think they are above it in all areas.”
Don’t see CAPITALISM mentioned anywhere in the interview?
Perhaps I missed it?
Capitalism is based on exploitation of everything —
nature, natural resources, animal-life and even other human beings.
For that reason, capitalism is suicidal as we see from the evidence
of Global Warming which it has produced.
Economies are created by people — they are manipulated by banks and
financial institutions. And those institutions and hierarchies provide
the propaganda and alibies for ups and downs and injustices in the
marketplace – hiding the evidence and covering up.
Neither is capitalism about competitition —
It’s about killing the competition –
Yes, FDR regulated capitalism and we survived with the New Deal,
but in the end capitalism is an evil which cannot be regulated and
which is highly destructive. Not only domestically, but it has certainly
been destructive all over the world. Now — with the fall of the Berlin
Wall, the end of “Communism” — our Middle Class were no longer needed as
propaganda for capitalism and the Middle Class is being destroyed.
Capitalism is a system intended to move the wealth and natural resources
of nations from the many to the few.
That is the source of our problems — the source of Global Warming —
and the source of corporate/fascism.
Reason 4,564,000,007 for Americans to finally start voting third party in significant numbers.
A $10,000 campaign contribution buys more than the inhabitants of an entire city pay in federal taxes-and by that I mean all federal taxes, not only income taxes.
“Greed is good” was a line from a villain (Gordon Gekko) in a movie (Wall Stree) whose greed sent him to jail by the end of the movie.
No one was intended to be conned by it and no one was conned by it.
Not really true. The writer of the screenplay regrets the line now, I’ve read.
Because Gekko was a charismatic figure (Michael Douglas won the Oscar) and because he even seemed to be “seducing” the hero (Charlie Sheen) for most of the film (seeming more appealing and vibrant than the character’s own father [Martin Sheen]), audiences were drawn to him, despite his ultimate downfall. Michael Lewis wrote the same thing about his book, Liars’ Poker, that people were attracted to the figures he had meant as cautionary tales, to the point where readers would write to Lewis and ask how they could join the Wall Street crowd. Oh, they wanted the cocaine and the expensive suits and the parties in the Hamptons, but don’t worry…they would never let it go to their heads, they’d reap all the rewards Lewis had glamorized but avoid the downfall.
This is precisely why I’m so chary of any drama based on an “anti-hero” these days: Familiarity breeds affection, not contempt. The Sopranos was supposed to be how Tony Soprano was going crazy (seeing visions and all) because the more decent parts of his nature were in conflict with his violent, immoral business. Up until the end of Season 1 (shark-jumping moment was the episode “I Dream of Jeannie Cusimano”) where all of a sudden Tony’s visions are just supposed to be his subconscious warning him not to trust his mother, and we’re not supposed to be repelled by him, we’re supposed to root for him against the Republicans, er, the REALLY bad bad guys. I stopped watching after the first season, only returned for the last because an HBO-less friend needed me to record the episodes for him, and found David Chase having Dr. Melfi (Lorraine Bracco) being called a fool for ever thinking therapy would help Tony and the viewing audience being mocked for watching the show.
But of course, Chase had made his millions by selling us the seductive lie, nurturing our amorality and peddling it to us. The last-second tweaking barely counts.
Look at Mad Men, where so many fans now worry if Don Draper (Jon Hamm) will find happiness in his relationships, when the original premise was that Draper was a liar from stem to stern, the biggest fraud in a world of frauds (advertising) and that *all* the relationships of that era were horrible and destructive, with a woman’s choice in life essentially limited to deciding which kind of whore she wanted to be. But, hey, Draper is competent, Hamm is charismatic and our “anti-hero” is now a hero, no matter how many women he uses (or fantasizes about murdering, or whatever)…
Even on my beloved Buffy the Vampire Slayer, where the vampires were designed as soulless murdering creatures that deserved nothing more than a quick death, mirrors for the demons within ourselves, but not fully-human characters (and the one exception was specifically designed as unique and unparalleled and his “redemption” was mocked and undercut and used to parody the “gentle vampire” tropes of that time…”People still fall for that Anne Rice routine? What a world!”), even there the pretty-boy vampire got all his crimes whitewashed, got a spinoff, and had the evil vampire whose chief purpose it was to mock pretty boy for being a wuss shoved into his role, continuity and characterization be damned. Because pretty boys equal ratings, don’t you know?
By the end of the series, Buffy barely ever slayed a vampire (a useless parade of Star Wars cantina scene-lite rubbersuited “demons” took their place, lacking any of the previous resonance) and vampire #2 was elevated above Buffy and her human cohorts by “virtue” of his fanbase of squeeing internet fangirls, who wrote polemical essays about how Buffy was a racist for harming the vampires and demons and the whole point of the series was to show how wrong-headed the early years had been and embrace the more “realistic” “grey morality” of the latter seasons and the plummeting ratings were just because we wuz all stiff-necked fundies, dontcha know?
Shades of gray, my ass. Excuses for glamorizing and embracing evil, more like it.
So, yes, “Greed is good” sold. And its consumers are now running the circus. Yay?
Excellent work. “no one was conned by it” is historical revisionism and reflects an ignorance of how capitalist society works.
You know of “The Clergy Project”, comrade? Lots of compradors say they believe in goodness of greed even if they “aren’t conned by it”. Conmen don’t believe in their con either but they find plenty of marks who do … temporarily. In fact, they often count on the marks not admitting they ever did.
You’re following the pattern, nixonclinbushbama.