A financial regulatory reform bill isn't going to get any better before it's passed and a conference may be the only hope for much-needed changes, a leading Republican negotiator said Thursday. 

"As someone who spent the last year and a half working on it, I'm under no illusion that this bill is going to get better. I'm disappointed," Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told reporters today. 

After a mostly party-line vote Wednesday on an amendment to change the derivatives portion of the bill authored by Republican Sens. Richard Shelby (Ala.) and Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), the fate of the bill was sealed, he said. 

"I think we all realize that this there's no real attempt for a bipartisan bill," Corker said. "We're outnumbered."

He said there may be a few Republicans who are satisfied with the bill but he's "not going to vote for a bad bill."  

Although Corker didn't rule out a "miraculous" event within the next week -- such as an amendment by bill manager Sen. Chris Dodd (D--Conn.) to improve the bill -- he expects the bill to pass without changes to consumer protection agency and derivatives provisions, which could sway more Republicans to support the measure. 

"If that happens I would support it," he said. 

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) on Thursday was undecided about supporting legislation that extends several tax and spending measures and expressed some concern on how the bill intends to raise taxes on carried interest.

"I'm concerned about anything that raises costs of doing business these days," she said. "I know they [Democrats] express concerns about taxes going up, spending going up, and deficits; but on the other hand it seems to be moving in the opposite direction of raising taxes and spending more." 

Snowe is one of a handful of centrist Republican senators that Democratic leaders hope will ultimately support the legislation. 

At least one Republican vote is needed for passage, assuming all 59 Senate Democrats back the bill. 

Raising the liability damages cap to $5 billion won't be enough, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) said Thursday after his first attempt to pass legislation to increase the amount oil companies would have top pay for economic damages. 

"We will have a robust figure at the end of the day," he told reporters this afternoon. 

Menendez is co-author -- along with Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) -- of legislation to raise the liability cap from $75 million to $10 billion. Their attempt to gain quick passage of the measure failed today when Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) objected.  

The cost so far is about $450 million including the "cost of spill response, containment, relief well drilling, commitments to the Gulf coast states, settlements and federal costs," British Petroleum said today in a release on its website. 

Several attempts by BP to stop the flow of oil from the ruptured well have failed. 

There appears to be broad support to raise the cap with remaining questions on how much. 

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said a controversial derivatives provision in Wall Street overhaul legislation would "weaken" financial stability.

The provision, backed by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), would require banks to spin off their derivatives operations. Big banks, which earn billions of dollars in revenue on derivatives, are strongly opposed to the provision.

In a letter to senators, Bernanke said the provision would compromise new regulations.

"Forcing these activities out of insured depository institutions would weaken both financial stability and strong prudential regulation of derivative activities," Bernanke said.

"I am concerned section 716 [referring to the specific provision] in its present form would make the U.S. financial system less resilient and more susceptible to systemic risks and, thus, is inconsistent with the important goals of financial reform legislation."

Bernanke said the provision would force derivatives operations into less regulated operations or toward foreign firms.

Bernanke is the latest U.S. regulator to oppose the Lincoln provision. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) chair Sheila Bair and Paul Volcker, White House adviser and former Fed chairman, have recently spoken out against the "spin off" provision.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said he believes support is building for a modified "interchange fee" amendment to Wall Street overhaul legislation.

Durbin faces an uphill battle to pass the amendment, however, with small banks and credit unions strongly opposed to the measure that would limit fees from merchants to debit card issuers. Durbin's amendment would direct the Federal Reserve to issue rules on debit card swipe fees that aims to ensure that the fees are "reasonable and proportional" to processing costs.

Durbin exempted banks and credit unions with $10 billion in assets or less.

"It wasn't introduced as a partisan amendment," Durbin said. "I brought this because it is a small business, retail amendment that I think is valid and just. I've had Republicans come up to me and say we're going to vote for it. And many Democrats who were against it say now with the $10 billion exemption for banks we'll be for it. Am I going to get every Democratic vote? Probably not."

The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), National Association of Federal Credit Unions (NAFCU) and Credit Union National Association (CUNA) all strongly oppose the amendment.

Many merchant and retail groups support reining in interchange fees.

Senate Democrats don't seem ready to call an end to debate on financial regulatory reform legislation just yet. 

After emerging from a caucus lunch this Thursday afternoon, Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) said the caucus hasn't reached an agreement yet on moving forward, as talks revolved around amendments that some lawmakers want considered before debate ends. 

So far, there has been no indication from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) that he's prepared to shut down debate.

Reid and Dodd were aiming to finish the bill by the end of this week but it became quickly apparent with the number of amendments offered that debate would stretch into next week. 

Dodd said votes would continue through tonight and amendments would be filed Friday but no votes are expected. Votes are scheduled to take place on Monday and "we'll be in until at least the early part of next week," he said about completing the bill. 

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Thursday said the summer jobs program being advocated by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) for inclusion in extender legislation should be considered emergency spending.  

"I think the jobs situation in this country needs to be dealt with like an emergency," he told reporters. 

Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) on Thursday defended an amendment to Wall Street overhaul legislation, saying that without his proposed change the Democratic legislation would "weaken" the power of a new consumer bureau of financial protection.

Carper is the main sponsor of an amendment designed to ensure federal standards and oversight on consumer financial protection regulations. The Obama administration said Thursday it is opposed to the amendment, arguing that it undermines the ability of states to pursue tougher regulations than the federal government. The administration and most Democrats have pushed for allowing states to go beyond the federal standards.

Carper said his amendment retains current law.

Carper's amendment is supported by 10 Senate Democrats and Republicans. Carper said Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd's (D-Conn.) financial legislation would limit the power of a new consumer financial protection agency and hand over power to states instead.

Here is Carper's statement in full:

As a former governor, I believe strongly in state rights. However, there are times when it’s not always wise to have 50 different states weighing in on what’s best. It’s important to note that my bipartisan amendment is supported by 5 former Governors and I think that’s a strong statement that this does not hinder states’ ability to protect consumers.

I support creating a new Consumer Protection Bureau to guard against unfair and deceptive lending practices.  All my amendment says is that we should make that bureau do its job. This is the cop on the beat that we need. Consumers benefit from a national banking system that has uniform standards. The Dodd legislation, unfortunately, would weaken that bureau and hand over its enforcement tools to the states. This would only create more confusion that would inadvertently hurt consumers. 

My amendment is a sound compromise that would establish clear lines of responsibility at the federal and state level. Also, my amendment would allow state attorneys general to maintain their current powers under existing law to enforce bankruptcy laws, debt collection protections, and unfair and deceptive practice statutes that consumers rely on to make sure they’re not being taken advantage of by bad actors.”  

The White House opposes measure to limit states from pursuing tougher consumer regulations than the federal government.