Democrats reshape Wall Street
Congress finalized sweeping financial overhaul legislation on Thursday, handing President Obama a major legislative victory heading into the midterm elections.
Obama intends to sign the legislation next week, while Republicans promised to work for its repeal if they retake Congress.
The Senate voted 60-39 in support of the 2,315-page bill after
ending debate earlier in the day. The House already passed the measure,
which will become law nearly two years after the worst financial crisis
since the Great Depression.
Democrats hailed the effort as a crackdown on the worst excesses of
Wall Street, which forced Congress late in 2008 to pass a $700 billion
taxpayer-funded bailout. The crisis helped push the economy into a deep
recession that claimed millions of U.S. jobs and led to double-digit
unemployment rates.
House and Senate Republicans criticized the legislation as a government overreach.
“I think it ought to be repealed,” House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said.
Republican Sens. Richard Shelby (Ala.), John Thune (S.D.) and George
LeMieux (Fla.) quickly echoed Boehner’s sentiments. “If you vote
against it, you know it should be repealed,” Shelby said.
The final vote came on a day when the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) announced a $550 million settlement with Goldman
Sachs, the country’s most storied bank, stemming from fraud
allegations. The charges were related to investments tied to the
housing market that touched off the crisis. Goldman acknowledged
mistakes.
The legislation passed the Senate with the support of only three
Republicans: Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and
Scott Brown (Mass.). Sen. Russ Feingold (Wis.) was the lone Democrat
opposed to the measure, which he said was not tough enough on the
industry.
House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.)
and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) shepherded
the measure, dubbed the “Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act,” through Congress during the last year.
The bill sets up a new consumer protection regulator to oversee
products such as home loans and credit cards; boosts regulation of the
$600 trillion derivatives market; creates a new council of regulators
to assess risks across the financial system; and sets up a new system
for failing financial firms.
After more than a year of lobbying, here is how some of the biggest interest groups made out:
Consumer advocates: Advocacy groups including the U.S. Public
Interest Research Group (PIRG) and Consumer Federation of America won
big with the creation of a new consumer protection agency. They pushed
back against financial industry lobbyists who called on lawmakers to
shelve the bureau during months of stalled private talks in the Senate.
There were repeated efforts to limit the power and scope of the
consumer protection office, but the new bureau largely resembles its
original vision.
Auto dealers: The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA)
waged a massive grassroots and lobbying campaign to win an exemption
from the new consumer protection regulator. They faced frequent public
criticism from the White House, Defense Department and consumer
advocates, but overcame the opposition at nearly every stage of the
debate. Auto dealers argued they had nothing to do with the financial
crisis. A wide range of Democrats and Republicans listened and agreed.
Big-box retailers and small merchants: Merchant and retailer
groups seized on the regulatory debate to push a long-sought provision
clamping down on the “interchange fees” they pay to banks and credit
unions that issue debit and credit cards. Senate Majority Whip Dick
Durbin (D-Ill.) backed the provision in the Senate that instructs the
Federal Reserve to require “reasonable and proportional” fees on debit
cards. The specifics are left up to new federal rules, but the merchant
and retailer groups overcame opposition from bank and credit union
lobbyists.
Community banks: Thousands of small banks lobbied hard for
relief from the consumer protection office and for preserving
regulation by the Federal Reserve. The Independent Community Bankers of
America (ICBA) was a vocal lobbying force throughout the debate. Small
banks didn’t win all of their battles, however. They argue they will
still be hurt by the “interchange fee” regulations, even though the
bill aims to exempt banks with $10 billion or less in assets.
Credit unions: Credit union groups fought and won many
similar battles as small banks. The National Association of Federal
Credit Unions (NAFCU) and Credit Union National Association (CUNA)
activated massive grassroots efforts to limit the impact on credit
unions of many of the bill’s provisions. Still, they lost in their
battle against the “interchange fee” measure.
Big banks: Big banks were in the crosshairs ever since the
financial crisis erupted and Congress was forced to pass the $700
billion bailout. The measure will lead to higher capital standards, new
restrictions on a derivatives market dominated by big banks and new
regulations of home loans and credit cards.
But lawmakers stopped short at numerous points of even more
far-reaching provisions. A measure to draw a fixed cap on the size of
banks failed in the Senate. Calls to reinstate the 1933 Glass-Steagall
wall between investment and commercial banking never made much headway.
A controversial provision to require banks to spin off their
derivatives trading was scaled back late in the negotiations to require
a push-out of only the riskiest derivatives. The “Volcker rule”
provision to limit proprietary trading and sponsorship of hedge funds
and private equity shops was also somewhat limited. There was a small
allowance for banks to invest capital in hedge funds and private equity
shops.
Goldman Sachs: Goldman received the brunt of the public outrage
and criticism in 2010 after the SEC alleged the firm fraudulently
misled investors about products tied to the sub-prime housing market.
The allegations pushed Democratic senators, notably Carl Levin (Mich.)
and Jeff Merkley (Ore.), to push for stronger restrictions on big
banks. The firm was constantly criticized in headlines. The settlement
announced on Thursday requires the firm to pay $250 million to harmed
investors and $300 million to the Treasury Department. The firm
acknowledged that it made mistakes. Still, there are some provisions in
the financial bill that would allow Goldman to convert away from being
a bank holding company and thereby possibly face less onerous
regulations.
Derivatives clearinghouses and exchanges: In the effort to bring
transparency to the multitrillion-dollar derivatives market, lawmakers
included requirements to shift many trades in the complicated products
to third-party middlemen. Those provisions will likely be a boon to
exchanges, clearinghouses and swap execution facilities, the
complicated plumbing of the financial world.








Most Viewed RSS Feed »
