President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 08, 2018 12:45 PM UTC

Bennet Deservedly Takes Heat Over Banking Bill

  • 9 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Sen. Michael Bennet (D).

As the Denver Post’s Mark Matthews reports, sometimes you’ve just got to shake your head and wonder:

A bill that would weaken oversight of the banking industry is up for debate this week in the U.S. Senate, where Colorado Democrat Michael Bennet’s support of the measure is drawing heat from its liberal opponents who warn the proposal could lead to a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis.

Bennet was one of more than a dozen Democrats who joined with the Republican majority on Tuesday to help the measure clear a procedural hurdle and set up a final vote in the coming days.

Its advance drew fire from Democrats such as U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who said the legislation was “all about helping big banks.”

The New York Times’ Mike Konczal sums up the dismay of liberal Democrats over the number of Democrats who joined with the GOP majority in the Senate to advance this legislation:

Why would some Democrats provide support for a rollback of Dodd-Frank? Proponents argue that this bill provides much needed relief for community banks and credit unions, which, these proponents claim, face enormous difficulties. They also say that it doesn’t endanger financial reforms aimed against the largest and most dangerous players.

But that view is mistaken: This bill goes far beyond the health of community banks and credit unions. It removes protections for 25 of the top 38 banks; weakens regulations on the biggest players and encourages them to manipulate regulations for their benefit; and saps consumer protections.

What do Democrats get in return? Nothing substantive that they should want. They could demand better funding for regulators or an appointment to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — or a vote on gun control…

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) was particularly vocal in her criticism of Democrats who voted for the bill:

Although Sen. Michael Bennet isn’t up for re-election for a number of years, it’s a problem to see him voting with Republicans once again on an issue for which his record has demonstrated a persistent blind spot. And it’s not just problematic for Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s consumer watchdog allies. As a moderate Democratic Senator who has always tried to bring opposing sides to a compromise on issues like protections for finance-product consumers, Bennet is co-sponsoring legislation that overwhelmingly aggrieves one side. Either Bennet is unaware of the staunch opposition to the bill he’s sponsoring or he doesn’t care, and neither seems likely to ingratiate the side of this debate he should be trying to persuade.

And we’ll say it as nicely as we can: although Bennet has little to lose in the short term, collaborating with Republicans to weaken banking protections over the loud objections of a possible 2020 presidential candidate isn’t the way to rally base Democratic voters ahead of the 2018 elections. We would encourage, to the extent a course change for Colorado’s senior U.S. Senator is possible here, that it be considered.

Tweet
Share

Comments

9 thoughts on “Bennet Deservedly Takes Heat Over Banking Bill”

  1. He's not blind.  Why do you think Anschutz loves him so much?  He fucked DPS over for the banks, now we're getting the same treatment.  It would have been foolish to expect any less.

    Oh, and that bill, just got fucking worse.

    Senate Claims to Fix Its Wall Street Bill, but a Look at the Text Says It’s Still a Giveaway

    There’s just one problem left: Almost nobody has any idea what the bill will ultimately look like. And they almost certainly won’t know until hours, or perhaps minutes, before they have to make a final decision.

    Senate Banking Committee chair Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, and four Banking Committee Democrats filed several last-minute changes in what’s known as a manager’s amendment late Wednesday. That’s a bill that incorporates unknown changes to a piece of legislation that has already passed committee. To spot the changes, a reader must compare the language of both bills.

    “We’re up to four dozen bills that we’re expecting to be included in the final package,” Hensarling told Bloomberg News on Wednesday. Those could be tucked into a final manager’s amendment to the Senate bill, without much advance warning, and put on the floor before senators have had a chance to read or analyze it. “[Hensarling’s] going to get a bunch of bills he can crow about,” said one financial services lobbyist working on the bill.

    1. Yup. I called and left a message. I expect the usual boilerplate email about how Senator Bennet cares about my concerns, bla bla. His 1.9 million in donations from the securities industry has to reap some benefits for them. It would be refreshingly honest of him to just say, "I was doing what my donors requested."

      1. 1.9 million is just in the 2018 cycle (2013-2018).  If you look at his career salary, he's gotten paid $3.3 million by securities and investment folks, along with another 650k from miscellaneous finance companies– over twice that much.

  5. It has been nearly 24 hrs. since this diary was posted and I am still waiting for one of you Michael Bennet acolytes to present us with a dispassionate dissertation on why Thurston deserves a pass on the excoriation he so richly deserves for this cowardly vote.

    Just because he occasionally throws the left wing of the party a scrap, he is not to be forgiven for his part in handing the banks the whole platter. Michael Bennet will never turn his back on his financial benefactors.

    Thanks, Thurston, for helping the super wealthy put their collective boot heel on the public, so they can hold them down and steal their money. We know it will make this a better place for all of us…well, at least 1% of us.

    1. Not getting any argument from me.  I contacted his office yesterday via email outlining my objections to his bill and asking that he withdraw his support, or at least undo the relaxation of the "too big to fail" threshold.  I also requested a reply (although that is likely to just be a form letter).

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

85 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!