Banking panel showcases 2020 Dems

Banking panel showcases 2020 Dems

The Senate Banking Committee may play a key role in the next presidential campaign, with several 2020 Dems poised to use the panel as a venue for showcasing both their policies and personalities.

Sen. Sherrod BrownSherrod Campbell BrownTrump-Pelosi trade deal creates strife among progressives Democrats question fairness of Senate trial after Graham, McConnell statements Sunday shows - Republicans, Democrats maneuver ahead of House impeachment vote MORE (Ohio), the panel's top Democrat, announced this week he would consider a White House run. That announcement came just a few weeks after Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenBiden, Sanders lead Democratic field: poll Advocates call for ObamaCare open enrollment extension after website glitches The Memo: 2020 Democratic tensions burst to surface MORE (D-Mass.) said she would “take a hard look” at a presidential bid.

And two vacant spots on the powerful Banking panel — with its lucrative connections to Wall Street — may be filled by other potential 2020 candidates. 


“I think the populism and YouTube moments get ramped up a bit anytime a member of Congress runs for president,” said Ian Katz, an analyst at Capital Alpha Partners. “They are very aware that anything they say could go viral. Warren and Brown are already very skilled at that.” 

Highly coveted spots on the panel give members influence over and access to the financial services industry, a political foil and fundraising ally to each party. Democrats and Republicans on the committee often have greater access to Wall Street campaign cash.

It’s not clear yet who will land on the Banking panel when Democratic leaders hash out assignments before the next Congress convenes in January, but several industry sources say they expect potential 2020 hopeful Sen. Cory BookerCory Anthony BookerBooker leads other 2020 Dems in petition urging DNC to change debate qualifications The Hill's Campaign Report: 2020 Democrats trading jabs ahead of Los Angeles debate Booker cancels NH activities, campaign says he has the flu MORE (D-N.J.) to be among the top contenders.

Booker, whose office did not respond to a request for comment, has both parochial and political reasons to seek a Banking panel seat. Thousands of Wall Street bankers and traders live in New Jersey, and insurance powerhouse Prudential Financial is based in Booker’s hometown of Newark.

His proximity to New York has also yielded millions of dollars in fundraising from members of the financial industry. Liberals have slammed Booker for accepting roughly $4.4 million during his 2014 Senate campaign from financial sector employees, more than any other candidate running that year.

A seat on the Banking panel could allow Booker to bolster his progressive credentials and align himself with potential rivals Brown and Warren, two fierce Wall Street critics.

The Banking panel could also allow Democratic contenders to elevate their policy platforms amid a growing field of likely candidates. Several potential 2020 candidates, including Booker, Sen. Kirsten GillibrandKirsten GillibrandAdvocacy groups decry Trump's 'anti-family policies' ahead of White House summit This bipartisan plan is the most progressive approach to paid parental leave Bombshell Afghanistan report bolsters calls for end to 'forever wars' MORE (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisBooker leads other 2020 Dems in petition urging DNC to change debate qualifications Sanders revokes congressional endorsement for Young Turks founder Cenk Uygur The Hill's Campaign Report: 2020 Democrats trading jabs ahead of Los Angeles debate MORE (Calif.), have introduced ambitious, progressive economic proposals seen as previews of the presidential platforms.

A spokeswoman for Gillibrand declined to comment on whether the senator would seek a position on the Banking panel, and Harris aides did not respond to questions from The Hill.

The panel has been a central battleground for the Democratic imposition of Dodd-Frank post-crisis banking rules and subsequent Republican efforts to loosen those regulations.

“Now is not the time to begin dismantling our post-crisis protections,” Brown said at a Thursday hearing. “When Washington policymakers suffer from collective amnesia, working families, savers, and taxpayers end up paying the price."

Banking Committee Democrats have been largely united in defense of the Dodd-Frank Act’s core tenants, but a bipartisan proposal to loosen parts of the sweeping 2010 law plunged the minority into a bloody intraparty battle earlier this year.

Progressives like Brown and Warren diverged last spring from moderates like Sens. Mark WarnerMark Robert WarnerDems want tougher language on election security in defense bill TikTok chief cancels Capitol Hill meetings, inflaming tensions Watchdog report finds FBI not motivated by political bias in Trump probe MORE (Va.), Heidi HeitkampMary (Heidi) Kathryn HeitkampPro-trade group launches media buy as Trump and Democrats near deal on new NAFTA The Hill's Morning Report — Biden steadies in third debate as top tier remains the same Trump wins 60 percent approval in rural areas of key states MORE (N.D.), Jon TesterJonathan (Jon) TesterTrump trade deal likely to sow division in Democratic presidential field Krystal Ball: Is this how Bernie Sanders will break the establishment? GOP braces for Democratic spending onslaught in battle for Senate MORE (Mont.) and Joe DonnellyJoseph (Joe) Simon DonnellyGinsburg health scare raises prospect of election year Supreme Court battle Watchdog accuses pro-Kavanaugh group of sending illegal robotexts in 2018 Lobbying world MORE (Ind.), the leading Democratic sponsors of the Dodd-Frank rollback bill.

While progressives were unable to stop the bipartisan loosening of Dodd-Frank, they’re poised to add to their ranks in 2019 as Heitkamp and Donnelly depart the Senate. Both lost their reelection bids earlier this month, creating two potential vacancies for rising Democratic stars.

But a national spotlight on the Banking Committee over the next two years could hurt the panel's efforts to tackle some of the financial sector's trickiest and politically sensitive issues.

“There are plenty of members of the Senate Banking Committee that are serious policymakers that just want to get the job done for their constituents,” said a former senior Senate staffer now advocating for financial firms on K Street. “But the committee offers this platform that will be too much of a draw for the politically minded members.”

The Democratic takeover of the House and defeat of several party moderates makes major legislation unlikely to move in 2019. Both parties are eager to reform the troubled federal housing finance system, but have tried in vain for almost a decade to reach common ground.

“I don't see any significant legislation in financial services making it through both chambers,” said Katz.

He noted that Heitkamp and Donnelly’s defeats could scare off Democrats from reaching across the aisle. While Heitkamp and Donnelly both lost their bids in states that strongly supported President TrumpDonald John TrumpDems want tougher language on election security in defense bill Five aides to Van Drew resign ahead of his formal switch to GOP The myth of the conservative bestseller MORE in 2016, Tester narrowly survived his reelection campaign.

“The lesson other Dems could take from that is there isn't much to gain by cooperating with Republicans,” Katz said.

Banking Committee Chairman Mike CrapoMichael (Mike) Dean CrapoGOP senator blocks bill aimed at preventing Russia election meddling The job no GOP senator wants: 'I'd rather have a root canal' Lawmakers battle over future of Ex-Im Bank MORE (R-Idaho) and Brown often tout their strong personal relationship, though the duo are fiercely divided on policy. The dismal prognosis for bipartisan bills and constant specter of the presidential campaign could create an explosive dynamic on the panel.

“It depends a lot upon the makeup of the committee after the midterms,” said the former Senate aide, but "the Senate might be operating in a much more volatile and political fashion heading into 2019.”