Mornin' Mycroft. Oh I have that one. But I did like this part from your link.
On the Republican side of the negotiating table, Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas fought to include three Dodd-Frank measures, all of which had already passed the House with bipartisan support. Mr. Hensarling is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee..... snip~
<<<<< Notice this part here about Bipartisan support and how some have tried to push this onto Henserling and the Repubs.
Now this part was quite interesting.....
As reported by Politico, those measures met opposition from the Democratic negotiator, Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York.
Senator Schumer did, however, back two separate bills that might affect the financial industry. One bill, originally drafted by Senator David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican, would require the president to appoint a person with community banking experience to the Federal Reserve Board. The second bill, also initially supported by Republicans and Democrats, would provide insurance companies some flexibility in meeting capital requirements.
At the last minute, lawmakers removed the terrorism insurance bill from the Cromnibus fight. Now, the House will probably vote on the terrorism insurance extension on Wednesday.....snip~
Here is what I had on Waters.
Yet, while Waters is vocal in her opposition of the bill–and President Obama’s lobbying of it–a press release from Speaker Boehner’s Office showed that she was for the Dodd-Frank reforms before she was against them [emphasis added by Boehner’s Office, italicized text part of minority views section]:Some Democrats are decrying the inclusion of a common-sense Dodd-Frank reform in the FY 2015 Omnibus Appropriations bill –
a bipartisan, House-passed reform that would protect manufacturers, farmers, ranchers, and Main Street businesses from onerous regulations that will hurt our economy.
Yet those same members, including former Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and current Committee Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-CA) once supported the very same provision. Here’s what they said in 2012, in the “minority views” section of the committee report for this same bill:
As amended, H.R. 1838 would repeal portions of Section 716 of the financial reform law, also known as the `push-out provision.' Section 716 prohibits banks from engaging in several types of derivatives.
Questions have been raised about this provision by economists and regulators including FDIC's Sheila Bair, who are concerned that it might interfere with a bank's ability to use derivatives to diminish risk. Section 716 was not part of the original House-passed version of the financial reform law.
During the Full Committee markup,
Democrats worked with the Majority to amend H.R. 1838 to continue the prohibition of complex swaps employed by AIG with devastating effect. H.R. 1838, as amended, addresses the valid criticisms of Section 716 without weakening the financial reform law's important derivative safeguards or prohibitions on bank proprietary trading.
Secondary Protocol: What If Cromnibus Blows Up? UPDATE: It Didn't - Matt Vespa
