Media: We don’t know what happened — but Dems won
The Democrats score a big victory on bank reform by ... giving the GOP and Wall Street the one thing they wanted?
Topics: Bank Reform, War Room, Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., U.S. Senate, Politics News
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., right, and the committee's ranking Republican Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., emerge from a meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, April 26, 2010, ahead of a crucial test vote for the financial reform bill. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)(Credit: Associated Press)The lack of details regarding the deal Senate Democrats cut with Senate Republicans to allow debate to proceed on the financial reform bill is a bit worrying. But that has not stopped and will not stop the press from pronouncing this a “big win” for Democrats. They just might’ve won the privilege of making the bill less effective!
The Slumber Party is canceled. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., gave Senate Super-Minority Leader Mitch McConnell an excuse to give the Republicans permission to vote to allow debate to proceed, which means we are only an additional theoretically infinite number of veto points away from a lightly regulated financial industry operating under marginally more scrutiny and a few more restrictions than they were when they broke the world economy.
But we don’t know what happened yet. Maybe when Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that the Senate would pull an all-nighter, that actually broke the Republican will to delay. Or maybe Chris Dodd, D-Conn., offered Richard Shelby some sort of minor, face-saving concession. Or maybe Richard Shelby won an actual concession.
According to “Roll Call,” “one Democratic source said Republicans had been promised votes on an unspecified number amendments.”
This, from McConnell’s statement, doesn’t explain much more:
“The time afforded by my Republican colleagues and Sen. Ben Nelson was instrumental in gaining assurances from the Chairman that changes will be made to end taxpayer bailouts and the dangerous notion that certain financial institutions are too big to fail.”
Here’s the problem with interpreting that statement: when McConnell says “end taxpayer bailouts,” what he means is, “do nothing to prevent future bailouts except promise there won’t be any of them.” And when he says the “too big to fail” thing, he does not mean he wants to do anything to restrict the size of major financial firms; what he means is “pretend gigantic financial institutions won’t bring down the world economy when we choose not to bail them out because we promised no more bailouts.” (Don’t worry, world economy: In Mitch McConnell’s Ideal America there will still be plenty of bailouts. You just won’t be allowed to predict their necessity.)
Alex Pareene writes about politics for Salon and is the author of "The Rude Guide to Mitt." Email him at apareene@salon.com and follow him on Twitter @pareene More Alex Pareene.




Tensions Brew Inside White House Over Counsel's Role
House May Launch Hearings Over Justice Department Media Spying Scandal
Is This The Face Of A New Global Human Rights Movement?
Anthony Weiner's First Campaign Began With An Apology For "Race-Baiting"
The Time Lois Lerner Failed To Investigate A Major Al Gore Fundraiser At The FEC
Comments
32 Comments