WASHINGTON (AP) – Senate Republicans have blocked President Barack Obama’s choice to head the consumer protection agency that was created after the 2008 financial meltdown.

His nominee, former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray, ran into near-solid opposition from Republicans.

As a result, Democrats couldn’t muster the 60 votes needed to move ahead on the nomination. Only one Republican joined Democrats in voting Cordray.

(more…)

From BusinessInsider:

The House Financial Services Committee canceled a scheduled “mark-up” of a bill to ban congressional insider trading last night, amid concerns that the committee’s chairman, Spencer Bachus, was moving forward with the bill to take the heat off his personal political troubles.

Bachus’ trading habits during the financial crisis were featured in a ‘60 Minutes’ profile last month as an example of potential insider trading on the part of lawmakers. He’s denied those allegations, and seized upon the trading ban — called the STOCK Act — to rebuild his image.

(more…)

Today’s congressional insider trading hearings led by Rep. Spencer Bachus showcased a carefully selected list of expert witnesses designed to protect the status quo and thwart real reform.

Among Rep. Bachus’s list of experts were Indiana University Professor Donna Nagy, Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service and Robert Walker, who formerly served as a lawyer on the House Ethics Committee. All three argued that current laws are fine as written. However, when Enforcement Division Director of the Securities and Exchange Commission Robert Khuzami was asked whether the SEC had ever brought action against any member of Congress or congressional staffers for insider trading, Mr. Khuzami confessed that if they had he wasn’t aware of it.

Rep. Bachus’s shell game is hardly a surprise. In the wake of the 60 Minutes investigation and my book’s revelations about Rep. Bachus’s 40 stock options trades during the 2008 financial crisis, he is desperately trying to reposition himself as a reformer, going so far as to now announce a plan to have members of Congress establish blind trusts. That is great as window dressing, but why not give the American people a clear picture of what is actually going on in Washington?

For starters, instead of stacking the deck, Rep. Bachus should have had a panel of experts who hold diverse views. Why not call a witness like UCLA Law Professor Steve Bainbridge who, in addition to being an expert on insider trading laws, has sounded the alarm bells for years on the insufficiency of our current laws?

Moreover, why not have an honest discussion about the fact that the SEC has never pursued congressional insider trading cases? We know the answer. Congress approves the SEC budget every year. And remember what happened when the FBI investigated Rep. William Jefferson for taking bribes? Congress threatened to slash the FBI budget!

The American public has lost faith in our political leaders precisely because of the sort of ridiculous show that Rep. Bachus put on today.

(more…)

From Henry Blodget, Editor of BusinessInsider:

Yes, this behavior may be widespread on Capitol Hill.

No, there is no universe in which a reasonable person would consider this behavior ethical or in any other way okay.

According to a new book called Throw Them All Out by Peter Schweizer, as relayed by Dave Weigel at Slate, Rep. Bachus made more than 40 trades in his personal account in the summer and fall of 2008, in the early months of the financial crisis.

The fact that Bachus was a member of Congress and traded on private information he received as a result of his job is bad enough. The fact that he was the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee at the time is simply outrageous.

(more…)

When Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) was convinced by a retailing giant to enact legislation imposing price controls on credit card transactions he engineered a massive wealth transfer from credit card companies to retailers – a cost that would ultimately be borne by consumers.  Opponents of Durbin’s fee warned of the consequences of his actions including increased costs for consumers and elimination of credit card incentive programs.  As Milton Friedman said, “there is no free lunch.”

After the government imposed their fee cap, the marketplace responded predictably.  Banks, including Bank of America, raised fees on consumers in order to cover the cost imposed by the Durbin Amendment.  Caught with his tail between his legs, Durbin and his allies declared war on the banks.  In a letter to the newly codified Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Durbin accused banks of trying to “sneak fees past” consumer and “urge[d]” the CFPB to “swiftly require financial institutions to post on their websites a standardized, concise and consumer-friendly disclosure form that lists the fees and key terms associated with checking accounts.”

Whether Durbin is successful in fighting back remains to be seen but what we do know is we now have a government agency at the disposal of elected officials that will police marketplace policies, fee structures and pricing decisions.  If it’s not bad enough that the Bureau will make regulatory decisions based on the political whims of politicians, their own justification for regulations are worse.  Much worse.

(more…)

From Politico:

Occupy Wall Street protesters will march to five banks in Manhattan on Friday and deliver thousands of letters to the companies — in the form of a “mass paper airplane throwing.”

According to the movement’s website, at 1 p.m., protesters will meet midtown at Bryant Park and march to the headquarters of Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase.

Thousands of letters that were submitted to occupytheboardroom.org will be folded into paper airplanes, and at some of the banks, protesters will execute a “mass paper airplane throwing event,” after which the planes will be collected in a large mailbag and left in the lobbies of the banks.

(more…)

From Politico:

After the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent a recent email urging supporters to sign a petition backing the wave of Occupy Wall Street protests, phones at the party committee started ringing.

Banking executives personally called the offices of DCCC Chairman Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) and DCCC Finance Chairman Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.) last week demanding answers, three financial services lobbyists told POLITICO.

“They were livid,” said one Democratic lobbyist with banking clients.

(more…)

In the pitched battle over whether government should take over our health care system, a group of pro-life Democrat congressmen held the line to oppose the legislation because they knew the bill authorized funding for abortion.  Under intense pressure from the president and their pro-choice comrades in the Congress, the group, led by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) flip-flopped when they received a letter from the president ensuring that government would not spend money for abortion.  They were had.

Now Sen. Rob Portman appears ready to “pull a Stupak.”  Under pressure from Democrat Sen. Sherrod Brown, Portman appears ready to cut a deal to confirm former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to a five-year term to head the super-regulatory agency known as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

Word on Capitol Hill is that Portman has assured Cordray he has no problems with his nomination and is asking for assurances that his concerns about the Bureau will be address – not in legislation, but in a letter.  Has Portman learned anything from the Stupak incident?  Apparently not.

Unlike Portman, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) is taking a principled stand against the creation of a new super regulatory agency and is not shaking in his boots.  Shelby has organized his colleagues who have pledged to oppose the nomination of Cordray or any other nominee unless the Bureau is reformed.  Unlike Portman, apparently, Shelby is smart enough to demand real statutory changes as opposed to “promised” changes.

The CFPB was structured in a way to give huge, and perhaps unconstitutional, power to its Director.  Alan Raul, who served as general counsel of the Office of Management and Budget and associate counsel to President Ronald Reagan, described the CFPB’s power as “an independent agency on steroids because Congress essentially exempted the director from any meaningful accountability or strong presidential oversight.”

(more…)

From Reuters:

President Barack Obama launched a broad onslaught against banks on Thursday, tapping into public anger over rising fees to garner populist support ahead of his 2012 re-election campaign.

Obama, a Democrat who is pressing his case for re-election with unemployment stuck above 9 percent, said his Republican opponents’ primary plan to boost the economy involved rolling back financial reforms his administration fought to pass.

Obama spoke at a White House news conference after thousands of anti-Wall Street demonstrators protested at New York’s financial district and in several U.S. cities this week against economic inequality and the power of U.S. financial institutions.

(more…)

Hopefully, it is not an ominous sign of things to come.

Last week, the Senate confirmed former Kentucky insurance regulator S. Roy Woodall for the one voting position on the federal Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) reserved for someone with insurance expertise. The term is for six years.  The FSOC is in charge of monitoring the financial system to guard against the failure of the largest bank holding companies and non-bank financial institutions.

For the past year, Republicans in the House and Senate have worked together to prevent the approval of numerous president appointments both through regular order and through the use of recess appointment authority.  By keeping the House from adjourning when vacation and breaks come, the president has been unable to exercise his power thus sparing the nation from another round of liberal appointments that can do great damage to the country.

Because the confirmation process is often one of compromise and deal making, some worry about the possibility of a deal involving Richard Cordray and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

Especially in light of the fact that the Senate Banking Committee has called a vote on the Cordray confirmation itself this Thursday, October 6.   Sources in the nation’s Capitol have told Big Government that liberal Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) is pressuring Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) to break the logjam, as Cordray is from Ohio.

(more…)

If the American Left has a Joan of Arc, her name would be Elizabeth Warren.  The Harvard professor was the designer and creator of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the independent regulatory agency that was given the power to regulate every financial transaction in America without proper checks and balances from Congress.

The plan was for Warren to head the Bureau and conduct a reign of regulatory terror on the economy.  But even President Obama got cold feet.  Warren was too radical to be confirmed by the Democrat-controlled Senate.  So Warren picked her replacement, Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray, packed her bags back to Massachusetts and declared a run for the US Senate.

The arrogance of power and the ignorance of history may be the best way to describe Warren and the government agency she concocted.  The philosophy behind the Bureau is simple – the learned and intelligencia must control the marketplace in order to protect the simple-minded.

We were given a little insight into her philipsophy by a person who videotaped a recent campaign appearance.  In Warren’s worldview, your success is dictated not by your efforts to work hard or your ingenuity, but by the state.

Warren addressed the issue of class-warfare in a manner appropriate for the Harvard faculty lounge.

“I hear all this, you know, ‘Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever.’ No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own —nobody. You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-forces and fire-forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory — and hire someone to protect against this — because of the work the rest of us did.

This arrogance extends beyond a philosophical debate.

(more…)

Many conservatives and even some liberals have complained about Obama’s penchant for appointing “czars” in order to avoid accountability under law. One of his most notorious is the Consumer Czar, Elizabeth Warren, who was appointed by Obama to help set up and, many fear, to eventually run the monstrous new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

We recently uncovered documents indicating the CFPB has been intensely involved in a 50-state settlement discussion underway with the nation’s largest mortgage lenders regarding alleged improper foreclosure procedures. (Anti-business zealots in the Obama administration and state attorney general offices are trying to extract a $20 billion “settlement” from banks to settle paperwork issues related to foreclosures.)

The documents, obtained in response to open records requests with CFPB and the offices of attorneys general from all 50 states, seem to contradict Warren’s statements before Congress suggesting her office merely responded to requests for advice, but did not seek to push its views. (We initiated our investigation into the controversies surrounding Ms. Warren and the CFPB on March 22, 2011.)

During a March 16, 2011, hearing of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, Ms. Warren downplayed her agency’s involvement in the state settlement negotiations: “We have been asked for advice by the Department of Justice, by the Secretary of the Treasury, and by other federal agencies. And when asked for advice, we have given our advice.”

But this does not come close to telling the full story.

(more…)

The INET Bretton Woods summit, summoned by George Soros and those who alternatively hide behind, or gather around him, has now happened.

But before trying to analyze whatever we may discover of what occurred there, it is critical to discern how it fits an overall picture.  For context, one must also see what the IMF and World Bank “communitarian” elitists are up to.

We find that before the Bretton Woods affair, focusing upon “new solutions,” there was a similar IMF meeting, called “New Ideas for a New World.”  It was centered upon “Post-Crisis Policy Making” and occurred March 7-14.  That gave some of them a lot of time to communicate and plan in quiet (the traditional word for that is conspire) when they were not attending official sessions, or making videos.

Then, we see that Soros’ April 8-11 conference ended just as the IMF and World Bank took up their April 11-17 Spring Meetings, just a limo ride away.  “Blossom of Spring, won’t you bloom and grow?”  Let us see what is budding in this intensive series of conferences, by the first one’s own promotional vid.

Here is a collection of pitches for “New Ideas for a New World.”  Hey, they left out the last word, “Order.”  Could it be that some of them know their version of order requires fomenting massive disorder first, the crises not to be wasted?  They also left out the word “Brave,” before “New World.”  Maybe that is because some of them like Huxley, have qualms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nsst1U8jidA

This video puts their dexterous foot forward about that March 2011 conference, while their sinister footfalls go on.  So who are these dudes, getting together and yukking it up (well, three out of four globalist manipulators seem to approve) and just how spooky are they?  What are the messages of the Big Money priests, to the unwashed, PITI-ful masses of principal, interest, taxes, and insurance payers?

(more…)

On May 5, 2009, I testified in front of Barney Frank’s Financial Services Committee that if Congress provided a guarantee of municipal bonds, the United States of America would lose its’ AAA credit rating. Over the next year and a half, I was labeled the “typical Orange County ultra-conservative alarmist” when I spoke at dozens of investment conferences on growing risks of munis to investors.

Even as the general market price of long term munis dropped over 20% in the fourth quarter of last year, virtually every major Wall Street investment bank continued to reassure investors that municipal bonds were a great buy. All that hoopla ended last week, when Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JP Morgan Chase Bank, acknowledged at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce event in Washington D.C., that hundreds of tax free municipal bonds issues will “not make it” and default.

Mr. Dimon has intimate knowledge of the municipal bond market, because his firm is the third largest underwriter and issued $47 billion of munis last year. Mr. Dimon added: “I don’t think it’s going to shatter America, I just think it’s a part of the credit cycle.” Mr. Dimon and his bank have obviously sold their municipal bond holdings, but perhaps the timing of the release this insider’s perspective on a coming market crash has something to do with his bank’s own needs.

Currently there are 50,000 municipal bond issuers in America and they have sold over $3 trillion in bonds to mostly individuals, mutual funds and money market funds. A good portion of tax free bond sales were to fund local government worthy projects, such as roads, schools and even city halls. But another huge portion of the money raised in the municipal bond market has gone to support politically connected contractors and other crony capitalists.

Mr. Dimon has real insider knowledge of this dark side of the muni market; since his firm recently paid $75 million in penalties and forfeit $647 million to settle SEC charges in an “alleged” municipal bond kick-back and derivative scam. It seems those nice people at JP Morgan Chase somehow got $3.5 billion in underwriting business after sprinkling $8 million in cash on the friends of elected sanitation officials in Alabama.

(more…)

What would you think if George Soros were organizing his fellow anti-American, globalist, neo-Marxist “thought leaders,” in pursuit of globally governed banking and finance, in a second Bretton Woods conference?

Would you consider that their goals include dragging American influence and incomes down, while confiscating much of our personal finances and giving them to other nations (and yes, the age-old financier network behind them) in the name of “communitarianism?”

Would you find their goal is to replace the bad influences of the IMF and the World Bank, with a much worse, more powerfully controlling, post-American global apparatus?

What would you think, if that meeting were being held this April 8th through 11th?

I got an email, last week; it was Tuesday the 22nd.  It was from George Soros.  To hear as straight from the dragon’s mouth as feasible, I had subscribed.  In this emailed article, he lamented the inequities of wealth among the nation-states of Europe, under the strains of their continuing insolvency crisis.  He warned of the dangers of national interest.  Rather, he proposed, not surprisingly, a further blowing of the global insolvency bubble, so the more indebted European nations may get along owing, while their lending nations get along being owed — all the while, blending and worsening the  financial and monetary crises and spreading this yeasty recipe further throughout the world, especially to America.

That was quite provocative.

(more…)

“If the average citizen understood economics as well as it was understood by economists 200 years ago, most of the nonsense that’s done in Washington would be impossible politically.”

Our Uncommon Knowledge all-star guest, economist Thomas Sowell, joins us to talk Basic Economics.  He argues that Congress cannot help the economy recover, but instead needs to “let the economy recover.”  The so-called financial crisis wasn’t a financial crisis at all.  It was a housing crisis that overflowed into the financial world.  Congress’s meddling, by making new rules to increase homeownership and access to mortgages, was a primary reason that the housing crisis even existed at all.

Sowell goes on to discuss the disaster that is the Federal Reserve, the irrefutable truth that tax cuts lead to tax revenue (therefore invalidating the “we can’t afford tax cuts” argument), and the misconception that our health care system pre-Obamacare was broken.

He expresses frustration at the lack of articulate Republicans (although seems to be quite the Chris Christie fan!) and little belief that the US will maintain its status as the world’s greatest economy.

Watch the full episode below.

(more…)

Okay, perhaps the title of this post is not quite as memorable as Charlton Heston’s famous line from Planet of the Apes, but it certainly captures my sentiments after reading an article in Slate that calls for the elimination of the $100 bill. The author, Timothy Noah, says that large bills are only for “criminals and sociopaths.” Here’s the crux of his argument.

…why does the U.S. continue to print C-notes…? Technological change has reduced much further the plausible need of any law-abiding American to carry a C-note in his wallet or to stash a pile of C-notes in his mattress.

Noah’s argument is unconvincing for several reasons. First, he is underestimating the degree to which “law-abiding” Americans use “Benjamins.”  And with higher inflation almost certainly around the corner, one can safely expect that $100 bills will become even more common in the future. Second, his entire argument rests on the statist assumption that government should restrict honest people because this will somehow make life more difficult for criminals. Yet he debunks his own anti-money laundering argument by noting that the government already has stopped printing larger bills, such as the $500 note. Has that stopped the drug trade? Hello? Anyone? Bueller?

Like much of what government does, the campaign against money laundering is a costly exercise with very few tangible benefits. This video examines the cost-benefit issues.

I actually think the moral arguments against anti-money laundering laws are even more powerful. As Americans, we should have a presumption of innocence in our daily lives. What business is it of government whether we want to carry $20 bills or $100 bills? And think about the implications of these laws.

(more…)

By Reps. Marsha Blackburn, Darrell Issa and Peter Roskam:

Last January, President Obama declared, “Jobs must be our number one focus in 2010.”

Since that time, more than 2.5 million Americans have lost their jobs and unemployment stands at 9.6%. Some focus. The President and his Democrat allies in Congress instead chose to unleash a torrent of bills that do anything but create jobs, like the so-called financial services reform bill that didn’t fix the real problem of government meddling in mortgages, and another round of “stimulus” spending that only deepened states’ addiction to Washington bailouts. Last week, Congressional Democrats canceled a vote on tax relief for all Americans until after the November elections, creating more economic uncertainty while delaying private sector job creation.

The primary job killer is the trillion-dollar folly of ObamaCare. The bill hits America’s struggling small businesses and their families with 2,801 pages of new taxes and complicated rules, creating a climate of hyper-regulation and uncertainty that the nation’s most important small business alliance – the National Federation of Independent Businesses –has called “death by a thousand cuts.”

Just a couple of those painful wounds: by 2018, self-employers and small firms will be hit by a $14.3 billion health insurance tax, while a projected $17 billion will be raised by taxing every business-to-business deal over $600. Washington insiders pushing ObamaCare appear to ignore these truths and clearly don’t understand the negative impact the law is already having on entrepreneurs.

(more…)

President Obama unveiled his latest economic proposal in Cleveland recently in a desperate attempt to boost the Democrats’ fleeting hopes of maintaining control of Congress this November.  But after two years of massive government spending and job-killing policies, the damage has already been done and it’s clear this fall’s election will be boiled down to a simple choice: job killers versus job creators.

With unemployment at 9.6%, the American people are clamoring for candidates with a solutions-oriented agenda for job creation as an alternative to the job-killing policies of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid machine.

Intel CEO Paul Otellini described it this way: “I think this group does not understand what it takes to create jobs.  And I think they’re flummoxed by their experiment in Keynesian economics not working.”

Simply put, candidates who propose job-creating policies and show how their opponent’s policies are killing jobs will win decisively in 2010.

American Solutions has already put forth its Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First plan, so let’s examine the top 10 job-killing policies of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid machine.

(more…)

In the six days that followed the attacks on September 11^th, the New York Stock Exchange was closed for the first and longest time ever since the Great Depression and World War I.  The markets would reopen on September 17^th, but to quite a rocky start.  During the immediate aftermath of the attacks, the heartbeat of our nation’s economy stopped, suspended in time.  And a forgotten class of Wall Street workers faced the difficult decision of whether or not to return to work. Those who did would return to a completely different world, one that had already changed them forever.  And today, nine years later, many of them are still there.  In a polarized political environment where the bad behavior of a few has unfairly demonized all of Wall Street’s workers, their contributions to our post-9/11 recovery have been largely ignored.  But had these workers made the choice back in 2001 never to return again, what might have happened?  This is one story, out of many, of the courage, determination and dignity of an entire class of forgotten patriots who stood by their country in the aftermath of September 11^th, 2001 when it would have been so easy to simply walk away.

Nine years ago, my brother Will was working for a Wall Street brokerage firm just steps away from what is now known as Ground Zero.  His office building overlooked Trinity Church on one side and the World Trade Center on the other.  Just on the other side of the river, near his home in Hoboken, NJ, he boarded the PATH train every day, bound for the bustling station at the World Trade Center.  Like so many others, he went to work on September 11^th thinking that day would be just like any other.

Just before 8:46 am as Will was settling into his day with his co-workers, a loud, screeching sound of shearing metal boomed just outside their building.  He looked up at the trading desk manager, and both were stunned.  Will thought it might be a high rise construction accident; the desk manager suspected an explosion.

(more…)