Ken Silverstein on an object lesson in Congressional priorities. Excerpt:
If you want to understand why Congress seems completely incapable of checking the power of Wall Street, look back to a hearing on the Hill last October 7, and the subsequent events surrounding it. On that day, the House Financial Services Committee hosted a panel on reform of the market for derivatives, the financial instrument which played such a notable role in the country's economic meltdown.Everyone rational knows that there is an enormous need to seriously reform the derivatives market, but the committee, headed by Congressman Barney Frank (D-Wall Street), invited a panel of eight guests who were distinguished by their uniformly pro-industry positions. They included Jon Hixson of Cargill, James Hill of Morgan Stanley (on behalf of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association), Stuart Kaswell of the Managed Funds Association (which, through one of its lobbyists, has delivered significant "bundled" donations to Frank) and Christopher Ferreri of the Wholesale Markets Brokers Association.
At the last minute, reports Silverstein, they invited a single witness from the other side to testify, a guy named Robert Johnson, and cut him off early. They wouldn't post his testimony to the committee's website. The conclusion?:
Meanwhile, Frank's committee has put forth its "reform" bill. "Too tepid, too weak, too late," Johnson says of the legislation. "Very industry influenced. We had a crisis and they are pandering to the perpetrators."
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
(or easier just ask the University of Chicago economists, they are forever stuck in 1979)
Frankly, they can go to the wall after the bankers and Wall Street parasites.
On the whole, hanging seems a better remedy than regulation.
AML: But what are the needs of the administration in power? Are they even any different from those of the opposition any more? We seem to have reached a point where politicians exist only to serve those who make big donations to their campaign coffers? People like Joe Lieberman don't even bother to hide the fact that they are completely beholden to their corporate backers.
Nick the Greek @ 7:07 AM writes:
" But what are the needs of the administration in power?"
To ensure their continued power and tenure in office.
"Are they even any different from those of the opposition any more?"
The elected membership of BOTH factions have, as their primary purpose, the ensuring of their continued power and tenure in office. The answer to your question, therefore, is "No."
The really intriguing part of that question is the last two words. I am not aware of a time when staying in office has NOT been the primary focus of a politician's efforts.
"We seem to have reached a point where politicians exist only to serve those who make big donations to their campaign coffers?"
Since when has this ever NOT been the case ?
Your servant,
Lord Karth
Funnily enough, I was going to post something on the healthcare thread below about how the battle over the public option/single payer is about more than just heathcare reform - it's about whether America is a democracy or an oligarchy where the needs of the health insurance indusrtry outweigh those of the people. But then, I think we all know the answer to that.
The battle over the public option is not about health care reform, nor is it in any way about helping people. It is merely a pretext, the means by which the corrupt in Congress find a way to effectively direct more money, influence, and winning/losing as a means of directing contributions, power, and retribution - in other words, the goal of the "public option" is to add 1/6 of the economy into the cesspool of corruption used to remain in power.
The "needs of the insurance companies" are precisely no different from any other company or should I say "employer", and that is, to remain viable. For while you may find that worshiping at the feet of Congress will get you crumbs from the table, all the real work and the entire substance of the country is wholly derived from the efforts of every American business, be it a health insurer or the chain of companies that make it possible for you to eat every day.
Diverting more of it into the hands of Congress, or giving them the power to remotely direct it will not result in benefits to anyone, except those who are so desperately seeking the corruption the money and power will buy. Precisely the opposite, we will ALL be collectively poorer for the vast ignorance and closed minded tomfoolerly that causes people to actually say and possibly even believe the sentiments you posted above.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.