Had lunch with 2 other unemployed Wall St women. One referred to Bernanke, Geithner, Paulson as the 3 stooges. She would now substitute Summers.

The pitchforks would be more effective in bringing about change we can believe in rather than Obama’s and Geithner’s half-assed bailout plan. Full scale depression in 6-8 months.

This is the second try at getting this story out there.

Originally, it ran in American Banker on 3/30. Josh Marshall and TPM picked it up and I saw it noted like Tuesday. Search American Banker’s site for the word “pitchforks”. Note that the shortcut I link to gives the text in context – but the whole article is behind a subscription wall.

I guess in its original printing it didn’t make any impact on the public at large, so they (Rahm, present at the meeting) re-leaked it to Politico.

All week, I thought that having that pitchforky message out there before Obama went to Europe and then nice video of UK protestors overwhelming many, many cops and crashing through the big windows at the Royal Bank of Scotland was doubtless intended to shut up the Santellis of this world and, if so intended, had that effect. The banksters got the message to start the week and we get it at the end….

But this looks like a Rahm leak if ever there was one.

I’ve got a pitchfork and I’m ready to use it–in conjunction with a torch and a mob, of course.

I’m pleasantly surprised that Obama is aware of the mood of the masses.

hey Swopa !

and treat the banksters who created the current mess as delicate, yet powerful interests who mustn’t be spooked -

mustn’t be spooked ? just what is it this cabal is gonna do if they’re “spooked” – take their toys and go home ???, wreck the global economy or something ?? granted, this is a tough story for folks like me to follow, but I believe POTUS and his Government are holding all the frickin’ cards. And if last friday’s sit down was BO as bad cop to Geitner’s good cop, I ask to what end ? just what is it WH wants them to do ? besides take yet more of our money ???

what’s prong with this wicked-sure?

Yeah, this is definitely another PR move. I mean, even if it is accurate, he’s pissing away a lot of taxpayer money to make his point. Mr. President, a more direct approach, please.

Why can’t he just apply ockham’s razor in dealing with this financial fiasco? Something like JoeStiglitz’s suggestions to Der Spiegel:

What do you suggest?

We have to reorganize our bailout system for the financial sector. For one thing, any bank that actually lends should get money from the government; more money to small and medium-size banks in smaller towns and less to Wall Street institutions. The government must also accept the consequences when banks become insolvent …

… and let them go bankrupt?

No, they have to be saved, because the consequences to the monetary system would be incalculable. But as a countermeasure, these institutions have to be nationalized, which even Alan Greenspan is now demanding. Then the government can close those business segments that have nothing to do with lending and make sure that the banks no longer organize esoteric stock deals that they themselves do not understand.

Sounds like a workable plan to me.

The Congress makes the laws, so what laws were in place in 2002-2006 regulating derivatives/CDS and other fun stuff?

How about a pitchfork movement? Display your pitchfork towards your street front and tie black and green ribbons around the handle. We want a system that remains stable and regulated for the people, (thus, the black and the green).

I am open to suggestions. Somehow, someway, I know I am ready for the pitchfork movement to take hold.

Hey, even tie signs to it with the names of our most appreciated economists to note their policies make much more sense.

This, combined with his London statement on not placing blame on anyone for anything (my reaction) , seems more of a STFU to our friends in the Financial divide. If you STFU, we can defuse the problem. Open your contemptuous mouths and you exacerbate the sales job.

The Congress makes the laws, so what laws were in place in 2002-2006 regulating derivatives/CDS and other fun stuff?

regulation of OTC derivatives, including CDSs, was prevented by passage of the CFMA of 2000. btw, congress acted at the request of the clinton administration. more details at my old diary:

Which Idiot Decided Not to Regulate Credit Default Swaps?

Not being a lawyer, I don’t know how this would stand legally. But if these bankers are acting like suicide bombers, threatening to take the system down if they don’t get what they want, here is a suggestion. Revoke their passports, freeze their assets and give them 120 days to fix their mess. Let see if they are willing to play chicken if they can not just skip the country and live off their stolen millions.

Oh that’s right. We need to pitchfork the Clintons because they’re the cause of everything that has happened over the new millennium! I forgot. George Bush and the republicans who controlled all branches of government were not to blame at all. We hope they enjoy their retirements and hope that gawd is good to them for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile: IT’S OFF WITH THE CLINTON HEADS & ALL DEMOCRATS WHO SUPPORT PRESIDENT OBAMA!

There is also this…It’s an interesting read.

But Gramm’s most cunning coup on behalf of his friends in the financial services industry—friends who gave him millions over his 24-year congressional career—came on December 15, 2000. It was an especially tense time in Washington. Only two days earlier, the Supreme Court had issued its decision on Bush v. Gore. President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress were locked in a budget showdown. It was the perfect moment for a wily senator to game the system. As Congress and the White House were hurriedly hammering out a $384-billion omnibus spending bill, Gramm slipped in a 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. Written with the help of financial industry lobbyists and cosponsored by Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), the chairman of the agriculture committee, the measure had been considered dead—even by Gramm. Few lawmakers had either the opportunity or inclination to read the version of the bill Gramm inserted. “Nobody in either chamber had any knowledge of what was going on or what was in it,” says a congressional aide familiar with the bill’s history.

It’s not exactly like Gramm hid his handiwork—far from it. The balding and bespectacled Texan strode onto the Senate floor to hail the act’s inclusion into the must-pass budget package. But only an expert, or a lobbyist, could have followed what Gramm was saying. The act, he declared, would ensure that neither the sec nor the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (cftc) got into the business of regulating newfangled financial products called swaps—and would thus “protect financial institutions from overregulation” and “position our financial services industries to be world leaders into the new century.”

Yep, the former Enron senator right winger Phil Gramm slipped this amendment in when no one was looking, but somehow this is the fault of the Democrats (who did not control the House or Senate then) and Clinton for not noticing. Yeah, yeah, and this sort of thing didn’t stop when the republicans controlled the House from 2002-2006 either. Speaker of the House Denny Hastert brought a bill up to Georgie to sign that had passed the House & Senate, but what Hastert did was illegal, which was, he brought the bill that was not PASSED by both houses, and instead, brought to Georgie the one he wanted to sign which didn’t have those pesky Democratic amendments attached to it!

We should also have Professor Frank Partnoy as a salon guest.

Great post, thank you. That’s the best I can describe how I feel, I want to believe in our new leader but he’s got to change the dynamics in his treasury department (and investigations, torture too) or I simply can’t. The article could be just more media crap to placate us crazy pitch fork holders. He talks well, action..not so much, how much time should there be to wait and see? Are we already past that time, I know I have felt that way.

Here’s more on Partnoy.

Dear President Obama,

Either punish these financial people, or step aside and let us do it.

Sincerely
The citizenry

i keep asking the same question – is that report really true? because i don’t see how it is.

first, gramm wasn’t even on the conference committee. second because i’m pretty sure it was the house version that was inserted. third because the inclusion was announced on the house floor before the vote. i know all this because i actually went back and watched hours of floor debates from the cspan archives, etc. here’s a little bit from my diary (links are in the orginal):

In May of 1998, the CFTC proposed “reexamining its approach to the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives market” and sought public comment. In particular, Brooksley Born, chair of the CFTC, “was concerned that unfettered, opaque trading could “threaten our regulated markets or, indeed, our economy without any federal agency knowing about it,”… She called for greater disclosure of trades and reserves to cushion against losses.” However, senior members of the Clinton administration pressured her to back off and when she did not, Greenspan, Rubin and Levitt asked Congress to act to prevent the CFTC from regulating OTC derivatives. Congress responded with a 6 month restraint period, during which the CFTC “may not propose or issue any rule or regulation, or issue any interpretation or policy statement, that restricts or regulates activity in a qualifying hybrid instrument or swap agreement” (language from H.R.4328). After a year of conflict, including a number of contentious Congressional hearings, in January of 1999, Brooksley Born announced she would not be seeking a second term as CFTC chair.

In November 1999, Clinton’s Treasury, Fed, SEC and new chair of the CFTC recommended to Congress in their joint OTC Derivatives Report to Congress that the CFTC be permanently barred from regulating most swaps. Congress eventually did so in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000:

Throughout 2000 hearings were held on how to modify the Commodity Exchange Act and several bills were proposed but not passed. Finally, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act was introduced as H.R.5660 in the House on December 14, 2000 and as S.3283 in the Senate on December 15, 2000. Also on December 15, the House version of The Commodity Futures Modernization Act, over 100 pages long and, according to Michael Greenberger, written by investment bank lawyers was attached as a rider the Omnibus appropriations bill (H.R. 4577) while in conference. Later that day, just before adjourning for Christmas and less than 2 hours after it was reported out of committee, the conference report was passed by the House 292 – 60 and by unanimous consent by the Senate before the bill had even been reported to the Senate floor.

and it’s really hard to see why it was necessary for gramm to sneak anything because a stand alone bill had earlier passed the house by 377 – 4 (October 19, 2000 – H.R.4541).

if i’m wrong about the facts, i would love to be corrected. but if i’m right, could we please dispense with the myth that it was all gramm’s doing? (i love to hate him too, but aren’t we the reality based community?).

no, not everything. but the clinton administration is responsible for, you know, what they actually did do. that is all.

Obama’s too good a politician to totally back the bankers; he’s going to try to come out somewhere in between (as you say, triangulate). I wish he’d do more, but it’s interesting that the Politico story claims that Summers was uncharacteristically quiet in the meetings with the bankers, as if he’d been told to shut up.

One failing Obama has is his desire to try to make everyone happy. But what gives me some hope is that he is not a foolish man; he gets things eventually. What worries me is whether he’ll get it soon enough.

Um. Slipped a 262 page measure into a hotly contested budget bill?

There are just too many things wrong with that picture. How does one slip 262 pages of anything completely unnoticed into any formally debated government document, and further does so into a document that is bearing the scrutiny of being part of a political showdown?

Either literally nobody on Capitol Hill is doing anything that even remotely resembles even their most rudimentary job function (up to and including all members of their staff), or something about that account is pure fantasy.

In either case, it absolutely is the responsibility of the President to read what the hell he signs into law, and more importantly, to understand it. Regardless of how it got in there.

selise,

I do not doubt your research. I am all for dispensing of myths. However,I think taking in a number of resources helps.

As part of the Read the Bill campaign, we’ve been writing a series of case studies highlighting bills that slipped through Congress with little time for public input or for lawmakers to review. After reading the following, please go to ReadTheBill.org and sign the petition to tell Congress that bills should be made publicly available for at least 72 hours prior to consideration. And now, your case study: the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000.

Yes your a great speaker Mr. President and I’m sure someone was told to leak just how disappointed you were at the mind set of the bankers that rule all on our planet, but those with pitchforks are only beginning to warm up not only because of the bailouts for those seemingly too big to fail, but for the next curtain call.
Large U.S. banks that have received bailout money from the government, including Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co, are eyeing purchasing troubled assets to be sold by other financial institutions under the Treasury Department’s plan to revive credit markets, according to a Financial Times report. The report said the banks’ plans are controversial and may raise public ire because the government’s public-private partnership is designed to assist banks in selling, rather than acquiring, toxic assets. This is nothing but a shell game with our tax dollars. I’m all for looking forward Mr. President, but unless you clean house your only going to piss more people off.
One other thing Mr. President. Maybe you should have someone tell Tiny Tim that his public/private plan is DOA as many of the funds he thought would purchase this toxic garbage….Sorry, I mean legacy assets, are walking away from the gaming tables.

Geithners toxic recycling plan nixed by big funds…..

Bridgewater Associates, the $71 billion money-management firm, has come out against participating in Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s plan to get private investors to buy banks’ toxic assets — a week after saying it was interested in it. In an investor note obtained by The Post, Bridgewater founder Ray Dalio gave Geithner’s plan two thumbs-down, arguing that the hopes of would-be buyers probably won’t be met by what the government is offering, especially when it comes to the sale of so-called legacy securities. In the note, which is entitled, “Why We Decided Against Buying in the PPIP and Why We Doubt That It Will be Broadly Subscribed,” Dalio cited economic and political concerns with Geithner’s Public-Private Investment Program, dubbed PPIP, saying the numbers just don’t add up — at least when it comes to PIPP’s legacy-securities program. – New York Post

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com…..no-to.html

Marcy is all over Gramm-Leach-Bliley at the top of the front!
Patrick Kennedy to Introduce Bill to Repeal Gramm-Leach … Maybe

I ‘d state what I’d like to do to these banker scum ,but it consists of a great deal of violence and the lurking mod would delete my comments

The federal government had been operating under a continuing resolution. The bill was sent to the WH on the last day of the 106 th Congress. Clinton would have had to shut down the government.

i want you to doubt my research – really, no joke!

but the article you link to is not a primary source and does not link to primary sources (and i think is wrong on some points, but the lack references means i can’t check most of their sources).

i’m asking for this to be treated as a matter of fact and evidence. not he-said-she-said like the M$M does.

the house knew – because of the floor statement, at the very least. the senate approved the bill by UC before it was even brought to the senate floor. from my timeline (links in the original):

December 14, 2000 – The “Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000″ was introduced by Thomas Ewing, (cosponsored by Tom Bliley, Larry Combest, John LaFalce, and James Leach) in the House as H.R.5660 – “To reauthorize and amend the Commodity Exchange Act to promote legal certainty, enhance competition, and reduce systemic risk in markets for futures and over-the-counter derivatives, and for other purposes.”

December 15, 2000 – S.3283, was introduced by Senator Lugar (cosponsored by Peter Fitzgerald, Phil Gramm, Chuck Hagel, Tom Harkin and Tim Johnson) .

Negotiations on Omnibus Spending Bill Conference Report for H.R. 4577, the “Consolidated Appropriations Act 2001″, continued through most of the day. In the Senate, apparently Senator Biden threatened to filibuster the bill unless authority for Amtrak to issue tax credit bonds for capital improvements was included and much of the discussion on the Senate Floor involved this issue.

At 4:48pm the conference report for H.R. 4577, H. Rept. 106-1033, was filed. In a statement from the House floor, just prior to the vote, Representative Thomas Ewing briefly described H.R.5660 and it’s inclusion in H.R. 4577. The video of his statement is available in CSPAN’s archives. The conference report on H.R. 4577 was passed 292 – 60 at 6:38pm. Democrats voted 157 to 9 and the Republicans 133 to 51 in favor of passage.

In watching the CSPAN archive for December 15, 2000 (Senate and House), it appears that the bill was agreed to by unanimous consent before the Senate had even received the conference report. At 5:48pm:

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that not withstanding the receipt of the papers, the Senate now proceed to the debate relative to the appropriations conference report and that there be up to 40 minutes for explanation to be divided between the two leaders, with 45 additional minutes under the control of Senator GRAHAM of Florida, an additional 20 minutes under the control of Senator BYRD, and an additional 10 minutes under the control of Senator SPECTER. I further ask unanimous consent that once the Senate receives the conference report, the conference report be considered agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table

Conference managers for H.R. 4577 were, for the House: John Edward Porter, C.W. Bill Young, Henry Bonilla, Ernest J. Istook, Jr., Dan Miller, Jay Dickey, Roger F. Wicker, Anne M. Northup, Randy `Duke’ Cunningham, David R. Obey, Steny H. Hoyer, Nancy Pelosi, Nita M. Lowey, Rosa L. DeLauro, and Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. and, for the Senate: Arlen Specter, Thad Cochran, Slade Gorton, Judd Gregg, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Ted Stevens, Pete V. Domenici, Tom Harkin, Ernest F. Hollings, Daniel K. Inouye, Harry Reid, Herb Kohl, Patty Murray, Dianne Feinstein, and Robert C. Byrd

Press Release from the CFTC:

Congress, in passing this law, has effectively implemented the recommendations set forth in the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets’ Report on Over-the-Counter Derivatives Markets and the Commodity Exchange Act

Deciding, for whatever the reasons may be, that it needs to get through despite what’s in it is not the same absolution or abdication as being innocently unwitting.

There is also this…It’s an interesting read.

But Gramm’s most cunning coup on behalf of his friends in the financial services industry—friends who gave him millions over his 24-year congressional career—came on December 15, 2000. … Gramm slipped in a 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. … Few lawmakers had either the opportunity or inclination to read the version of the bill Gramm inserted.

“Nobody in either chamber had any knowledge of what was going on or what was in it,” says a congressional aide familiar with the bill’s history.

… The balding and bespectacled Texan strode onto the Senate floor to hail the act’s inclusion into the must-pass budget package. … The act, he declared, would ensure that neither the sec nor the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (cftc) got into the business of regulating newfangled financial products called swaps …

“swaps” he lied. If they had wanted to do this honestly they would have called them insurance policies. But then, that would mean having them regulated.

And they blame Bill Clinton. /s

Finally.

I’m sure AIG / Wall Street bankers will try to stop that. Now that Sen. Specter has committed political suicide, it is clear that we will have 60 seats in the Senate soon. What will the politicians do when that happens? After hearing that excuse over and over people will demand action, and except no excuses. If the symbol for populists is the pitchfork, what is the symbol for the sellouts?

are you saying i’m wrong about this:

In November 1999, Clinton’s Treasury, Fed, SEC and new chair of the CFTC recommended to Congress in their joint OTC Derivatives Report to Congress that the CFTC be permanently barred from regulating most swaps.

from the us treasury press release (November 9, 1999) i reference:

The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets on Tuesday unanimously recommended changes to the Commodities Exchange Act that are designed to create legal certainty in the over-the-counter derivatives markets and reduce systemic risk.

“Our new financial system has to be based on old virtues,” Treasury Secretary Summers, Chairman of the Working Group, said. “As we worked to clarify the legal framework for OTC derivatives, we were guided by time-tested principles of competition, efficiency and transparency. If enacted, these changes will strengthen the financial system by improving a segment of the market which helps American businesses to hedge and manage risk more effectively and reduces borrowing costs for both individuals and corporations.”

As members of the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, the Treasury Secretary and the Chairmen of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, studied the existing regulatory framework, recent innovations, and the potential for future developments in the over-the-counter derivatives markets.

Among the report’s recommendations are:

Creating an exclusion from the CEA for swaps agreements that are bilateral agreements between eligible parties on a principal-to-principal basis. (The exclusion does not extend to agreements involving non-financial commodities with finite supplies).

With Phil Gramm and the republicans in control of the Senate under Clinton in 1999/200, they accomplished a lot:

“On Capitol Hill, Mr. Gramm became the most effective proponent of deregulation in a generation, by dint of his expertise (a Ph.D in economics), free-market ideology, perch on the Senate banking committee and force of personality (a writer in Texas once called him “a snapping turtle”). And in one remarkable stretch from 1999 to 2001, he pushed laws and promoted policies that he says unshackled businesses from needless restraints but his critics charge significantly contributed to the financial crisis that has rattled the nation.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11…..wanted=all

i never said phil gramm wasn’t involved, i challenged the myth that he snuck an unwanted bill, the cfma 2000, into the conference report.

and if you read my diary you would see the important role played by wendy gramm.

Well, in conference recently Chris Dodd was able to take out the part about bonuses, Selise, and most of the country had no idea he had done that. I don’t see why you put lots of trust & respect into Phil Gramm and others by saying it’s Clinton’s fault that Gramm inserted the Enron Loophole while no one was looking.

I’m sure all republicans are honest people and from now on when they do something that is less than stellar, we should blame Clinton for it.

Republicans introduced a 5 day advance/wait amendment yesterday. Dems overwhelmingly defeated it.

i don’t think i ever used phil gram as a source. i used official statements by members of the clinton administration (see my comment @34), i used congressional hearing transcripts, gao reports, cspan archives and the like. there were also some references to nyt articles and similar.

i have no idea what you are talking about.

damn.

thanks for that link. i think.

yesterday’’s entire multi amendment process and actual votes.. is a long list of outrages.

I’m still fuming over the outcome of Plantation Blanche ‘Antoinette” Lincoln’s estate tax amendment.. Non binding though it may be… the worst of the slippery slope is filled with senators doing the shock doctor shuffle.

i didn’t know about any of that – thanks for telling me. was any of this discussed on a post or diary? i’ve missed a lot.

Great post, Swopa, thanks.

Okay. You believe Clinton is to blame while his out of control right wing Congress is not and you have the primary sources to prove it.

No way would Phil Gramm slip in a 262-page amendment in conference before Bill Clinton signed it into law. Of course, the White House was in limbo and getting ready for the new president, so why would he take advantage of that?

I’m sure Bill Clinton was behind Chris Dodd taking out the amendment about the executive bonuses too recently. In fact, I’m busy right now blaming Bill Clinton for everything that I don’t have time to talk about this anymore, Selise, so if you would please excuse me. I’m at the part in history where Bill Clinton employed John Wilkes Booth to assassinate Abe Lincoln. I’ve got a long night ahead of me as you can see. LOL

I don’t know. Just happened to turn on cspan late last night.. Senate voted on a couple final amendments and the budget, which prompted me to check the vote page and blow a gasket. /s

no. i think the clinton administration played a key role, along with gramm and others (actually most of both the Rs and the Ds).

wow. well, i’m glad to know it even if it pisses me off too. haven’t had cspan on much this week, and i did miss a lot. but i’ve been trying to read more (mostly background economics-type stuff) in order to have some idea how to put what’s happening in some kind of context.

how is your arm doing? i didn’t know you didn’t have insurance (((ES))).

p.s. i don’t know if this is so, but i think i saw that amy goodman was scheduled to be on bill moyers tonight.

The quoted Enron emails state a great deal. I can bring the exact emails up on the Enron email data base when I get time.

Eureka @ 38. Thanks for the link.

Getting better slowly but surely… in just the last 36/48 hours the breaks quit rattling when I walk. Thank goddess!

I always tivo Moyers, hope she’s on.

is there anything about gramm sneaking the cfma into the conference report?

p.s. thanks for that link, i didn’t have it.

rattling? yikes!!!

v glad to hear that you are healing, even if it’s slow.

don’t typically watch moyers either – usually listen to the podcast sometime during the weekend.

i’m beat. gonna crash. good night…

g’ nite selise.

Your hyperbole is pretty annoying. Yes, we know the Bush Crime Family was involved in a lot of bad stuff. No dispute there. But open your eyes and realize that Clinton paved the way for some of these abuses–not to mention the depletion of the social safety nets that help people in this time (e.g. welfare reform). Hell, in order for political survival after ‘94 Clinton co-opted the Republican agenda! I just don’t understand how people revere him so much when he’s just slightly left Republicrat.