• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Congress passes financial reform bill

That anything was passed is a small miracle considering the obstacles thrown up by the Republicans and Wall Street; once again the Democratic leadership in the Congress and presidency have done something thought impossible just a few short months ago.
 
That anything was passed is a small miracle considering the obstacles thrown up by the Republicans and Wall Street; once again the Democratic leadership in the Congress and presidency have done something thought impossible just a few short months ago.

If you call, making buddy buddy with politicians and getting soft "reforms" past, the impossible.
I've got news, this isn't the first time.

You didn't bother to read to at least read a summery of the bill, did you.
 
That anything was passed is a small miracle considering the obstacles thrown up by the Republicans and Wall Street; once again the Democratic leadership in the Congress and presidency have done something thought impossible just a few short months ago.

i will grant you that the perfect is often the enemy of the good
however, with all of the remaining loop holes that will soon be exploited, i am speculating we are little better off than we were before
 
That really makes no difference.

We make implicit guarantees to some banks that we will bail them out every time they make a brain dump and do something stupid.
That's what happens when you continually socialize loss.

I think really needs to be in place is an official garantee and access to the discount window for the morgage insurers, monoline insurers, and insurance companies doing CDS's. If anything, from this crisis we should have learned that private companies cannot internalize systemic risk, and implicit garantees like on fannie and freddie will eventually turn into a gigantic mess. We also need to stop trying to define what a bank is and isn't, and jsut regulate credit, maturity, liquidity, etc.
 
I think really needs to be in place is an official garantee and access to the discount window for the morgage insurers, monoline insurers, and insurance companies doing CDS's. If anything, from this crisis we should have learned that private companies cannot internalize systemic risk, and implicit garantees like on fannie and freddie will eventually turn into a gigantic mess. We also need to stop trying to define what a bank is and isn't, and jsut regulate credit, maturity, liquidity, etc.

I'm not super familiar with the internal workings of mortgage insurers etc.
So I really can't comment on that.

For the latter, you'll find no disagreement from me.
 
Buried deep in the bowels of the massive financial-regulation bill the Senate passed Thursday are massive race- and gender-employment provisions that will cost countless millions to enforce and appear to duplicate other civil-rights initiatives already in place.

More importantly, all private financial institutions doing business with the federal government will be affected by them, sources tell Newsmax.

Opponents say the provision was put in the bill to help garner political support for its passage. They object that it was inserted with almost no discussion or debate, and call it a "power grab."

Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute who served as chief of staff for former President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, tells Newsmax that the rules represent a "dramatic change in employment legislation."

Four members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recently penned a letter to Vice President Joe Biden, Majority Leader Harry Reid, and several other leading senators, objecting to the new fair-employment regime in the Dodd-Frank legislation now headed to the president's desk.

"The likelihood that it will in fact promote discrimination is overwhelming," the letter states.

Section 342 of the bill calls for an "Office of Minority and Women Inclusion" to be established in each of 29 federal bureaus and offices.

Quotas Hidden in Bank Reform Bill Will Cost Taxpayers Millions

This crap of passing 2000+ page bills without reading them has to end. God only knows what else this POS has in it.
 
other than the title i saw nothing which identified any numerical quotas which were established
anyone have anything to show that quotas will actually be in effect?
 
That anything was passed is a small miracle considering the obstacles thrown up by the Republicans and Wall Street; once again the Democratic leadership in the Congress and presidency have done something thought impossible just a few short months ago.

Schmoozing with the same special interests that used to support the GOP. I never thought it impossible, though. I have always known that the Democratic party is full of whores. :mrgreen:
 
other than the title i saw nothing which identified any numerical quotas which were established
anyone have anything to show that quotas will actually be in effect?

In addition to this bill's well-publicized plans to establish over a dozen new financial regulatory offices, Section 342 sets up at least 20 Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion. This has had no coverage by the news media and has large implications.

The Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks, the Board of Governors of the Fed, the National Credit Union Administration, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...all would get their own Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.

Each office would have its own director and staff to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency's workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors.

What would be the mission of this new corps of Federal monitors? The Dodd-Frank bill sets it forth succinctly and simply - all too simply. The mission, it says, is to assure "to the maximum extent possible the fair inclusion" of women and minorities, individually and through businesses they own, in the activities of the agencies, including contracting.

RealClearMarkets - Racial, Gender Quotas in the Financial Bill?


SEC. 342. OFFICE OF MINORITY AND WOMEN INCLUSION.

(a) Office of Minority and Women Inclusion-

(1) ESTABLISHMENT-

(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in subparagraph (B), not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, each agency shall establish an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion that shall be responsible for all matters of the agency relating to diversity in management, employment, and business activities.

(B) BUREAU- The Bureau shall establish an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion not later than 6 months after the designated transfer date established under section 1062.

(2) TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITIES- Each agency that, on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, assigned the responsibilities described in paragraph (1) (or comparable responsibilities) to another office of the agency shall ensure that such responsibilities are transferred to the Office.

(3) DUTIES WITH RESPECT TO CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS- The responsibilities described in paragraph (1) do not include enforcement of statutes, regulations, or executive orders pertaining to civil rights, except each Director shall coordinate with the agency administrator, or the designee of the agency administrator, regarding the design and implementation of any remedies resulting from violations of such statutes, regulations, or executive orders.

(b) Director-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Director of each Office shall be appointed by, and shall report to, the agency administrator.

The position of Director shall be a career reserved position in the Senior Executive Service, as that position is defined in section 3132 of title 5, United States Code, or an equivalent designation.


(2) DUTIES- Each Director shall develop standards for--

(A) equal employment opportunity and the racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of the workforce and senior management of the agency;

(B) increased participation of minority-owned and women-owned businesses in the programs and contracts of the agency, including standards for coordinating technical assistance to such businesses; and

(C) assessing the diversity policies and practices of entities regulated by the agency.

(3) OTHER DUTIES- Each Director shall advise the agency administrator on the impact of the policies and regulations of the agency on minority-owned and women-owned businesses.

(4) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in paragraph (2)(C) may be construed to mandate any requirement on or otherwise affect the lending policies and practices of any regulated entity, or to require any specific action based on the findings of the assessment.

(c) Inclusion in All Levels of Business Activities-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Director of each Office shall develop and implement standards and procedures to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the fair inclusion and utilization of minorities, women, and minority-owned and women-owned businesses in all business and activities of the agency at all levels, including in procurement, insurance, and all types of contracts.

(2) CONTRACTS- The procedures established by each agency for review and evaluation of contract proposals and for hiring service providers shall include, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a component that gives consideration to the diversity of the applicant. Such procedure shall include a written statement, in a form and with such content as the Director shall prescribe, that a contractor shall ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the fair inclusion of women and minorities in the workforce of the contractor and, as applicable, subcontractors.

Bill Text - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
 
Obama will stop at nothing to harm this nation. Have the read the bill? Those who wrote it have admitted that they don't know exactly how it will work. All it does is serve special interests and further damage our nation. Shame of the Democrats and Obama for passing garbage. But meh, what else can we expect? :shrug:
 
@ Harry G -- I disagree with your "give the people what they want and need" approach to payday loan stores. If that service weren't available, people would do a better job managing their money.
Ridiculous illustration: People want and need illegal drugs; they want and need body parts and should be able to buy them (actually, I could sure make an argument for that one); people want and need to be euthanized.
Sometimes we need to protect people from themselves. Do you think that these payday loan places could operate profitably at less than 400%-1200% interest? They can and do as a number of states severely regulate the amount of interest they can charge. Then ask a different kind of moral question (probably having nothing to do with the regulations passed): Should a married man be able to walk into a payday loan store and obligate himself to usurous interest rates without his wife knowing? (to finance a gambling habit and strip clubs, i.e.) Off topic, but these payday loan stores are a blight. And they're makin' corporations rich at the expense of the people who can afford it least. Isn't that so often the way.
 
@ Harry G -- I disagree with your "give the people what they want and need" approach to payday loan stores. If that service weren't available, people would do a better job managing their money.

Sometimes we need to protect people from themselves. Do you think that these payday loan places could operate profitably at less than 400%-1200% interest? They can and do as a number of states severely regulate the amount of interest they can charge. Then ask a different kind of moral question (probably having nothing to do with the regulations passed): Should a married man be able to walk into a payday loan store and obligate himself to usurous interest rates without his wife knowing? (to finance a gambling habit and strip clubs, i.e.) Off topic, but these payday loan stores are a blight. And they're makin' corporations rich at the expense of the people who can afford it least. Isn't that so often the way.

Well I agree with those things you listed.
I guess that's just me though.

It doesn't bother me in the least that people make money off of payday loans, that's kinda the point of operating the business.

These people will not learn better money management by restricting payday lending, they'll go to pawn shops, take micro loans and on and on.
Now if you restrict the whole market, you're asking for loan sharking which is worse.

So you can have your legit lender or your violent loan shark.
 
Another major achievement along side Health Care Reform, Economic Stimulus and much more. This is the Can Do Congress!

Yes brother, praise the pagan gods for progress toward a unified communist utopia. Maybe you be bless with the crushy weight of 100% taxes on you income!! Pass on the love.
 
Back
Top Bottom