<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/christopher_dodd_d_conn/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 13:20:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The most cowardly act of a retiring politician</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/24/lieberman_hutchison_retire/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/24/lieberman_hutchison_retire/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joe Lieberman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Tex.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/01/24/lieberman_hutchison_retire</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You shouldn't get to say you'd win an election if you're not willing to run in it]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris Dodd <a href="http://www.observer.com/2010/politics/dodd-exits-gracefully">was facing near-certain defeat</a> when he pulled the plug on his Senate reelection bid early last year, and to his credit he didn't try to pretend otherwise.</p><p>"I'm very aware of my present political standing," he said in announcing his decision to retire. I was reminded of his unusually -- and refreshingly -- candid statement this morning, when <a href="http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/01/24/quotes_of_the_day.html">Taegan Goddard flagged comments</a> made by Joe Lieberman and Kay Bailey Hutchison, both of whom recently announced retirement plans of their own, on Sunday's "This Week":</p><blockquote>
<p>"I believed I would have won re-election. Obviously, it would have been a tough campaign. But, you know, as I said, so what else is new?"</p>
<p>-- Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), in an interview on This Week.</p>
<p>"I think that, if I had run, I would have won. It would have been a tough race, for sure, but I think I would have won."</p>
<p>-- Sen., Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), also speaking on This Week.</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/01/24/lieberman_hutchison_retire/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/24/lieberman_hutchison_retire/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>33</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Whoops! Chris Dodd swears on Twitter</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/chris_dodd_twitter/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/chris_dodd_twitter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/11/18/chris_dodd_twitter</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Or one of his staffers does, at least]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here's my Chris Dodd fact sheet:</p><ul>
<li>He had <a href="http://wonkette.com/231889/sex-and-crab-lice-in-high-society-the-chris-dodd-story">pubic lice</a>.</li>
<li>There was <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5L2y8nkaL9A">a bug on his head</a> during a debate and he didn't seem to notice.</li>
</ul><p>Obviously there's also other stuff like AIG and Countrywide and moving his entire family to Iowa to run for president and then losing and also he dated Bianca Jagger and Carrie Fisher, but those are the important facts. And to that list <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/other-news/129933-dodd-makes-major-twitter-gaffe-u-love-torturing-me-with-this-s">I can add this:</a> Someone loves torturing him with this shit, according to Twitter.</p><p>
    <img class='wp-image-10034565' src='http://media.salon.com/2010/11/doddtwitter.png' />
  </p><p>What is this shit? And who is torturing him with it? We may never know -- <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/senchrisdodd">his staff quickly deleted the tweet and apologized for it.</a> It was, obviously, a misfired direct message, and it was probably drafted not by Dodd but by a staffer. But just for a minute, it looked like maybe the retiring senator was just going to cut loose during his last month in office.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/chris_dodd_twitter/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/chris_dodd_twitter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The New York Times misses the mark on Linda McMahon</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/27/dodd_democrats_better_off/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/27/dodd_democrats_better_off/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 21:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Blumenthal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/09/27/dodd_democrats_better_off</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An exhaustive magazine piece attempts to explain her rise, but presents some curious history instead]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The rise of Linda McMahon, the wrestling executive who is pumping tens of millions of dollars into her own Republican Senate campaign in Connecticut, is certainly a fascinating story. McMahon has pulled <a href="http://www.pollster.com/blogs/ctsen_50_blumenthal_d_45_mcmah.php">within striking distance</a> of Democrat Richard Blumenthal in recent polling, and the idea that she'll win in November -- and possibly deliver the Senate to the GOP&#160;in the process -- is no longer laughable.</p><p>But the New York Times magazine sure has a funny way of looking at the race. The premise of Matt Bai's <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/magazine/26politics-t.html?pagewanted=1&amp;_r=1">exhaustive piece</a> in Sunday's issue is that McMahon is succeeding in part because of the decline of powerful party institutions. There is, obviously, something to this, in the sense that party machines everywhere aren't what they used to be.</p><p>But Bai suggests that the unwillingness of state Democratic leaders to coax the scandalized Sen. Chris Dodd into seeking another term this year is a sign of that decline, and that in the day of John Bailey, the long-departed state party boss, there would have been a full-court press to get :</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/09/27/dodd_democrats_better_off/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/27/dodd_democrats_better_off/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dodd vs. Warren shows that government is broken</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/24/dodd_and_elizabeth_warren/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/24/dodd_and_elizabeth_warren/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elizabeth Warren]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/08/24/dodd_and_elizabeth_warren</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The senator says the professor can't be confirmed, so Obama, with two majorities, should compromise]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alert the <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/elizabeth_warren/index.html">Elizabeth Warren</a> media! We've known for at least a month that Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., the lame-duck chairman of the Senate Banking and Finance Committee, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/12/chris-dodd-top-democrat-f_n_680123.html">isn't the biggest fan of the Harvard Law School bankruptcy expert</a> whom progressives are championing for the job of director of the newly created Bureau for Consumer Financial Protection. Here's the latest news, from <a href="http://www.americanbanker.com/issues/175_162/dodd-1024486-1.html?zkPrintable=1&amp;nopagination=1">a lengthy American Banker interview with Dodd</a> recapitulating the arduous legislative struggle for bank reform: He's still opposed.</p><blockquote>
<p>Dodd acknowledged he wanted FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair to consider heading the consumer bureau, but he confirmed that she is not interested.</p>
<p>He also recognized that consumer groups were lobbying to have Harvard professor Elizabeth Warren head the agency, but he said she would have difficulty being confirmed.</p>
<p>"If the administration goes through an eight-month debate over who is going to run this, you are going to do damage before you start," Dodd said. "You need to have a good-quality individual, and if [Warren] can be confirmed, then step up and do it. I just think it's a problem, but I could be wrong."</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/08/24/dodd_and_elizabeth_warren/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/24/dodd_and_elizabeth_warren/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>60</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A history lesson from Elizabeth Warren</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/13/warren_clinton_and_dodd/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/13/warren_clinton_and_dodd/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elizabeth Warren]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/08/13/warren_clinton_and_dodd</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The consumer advocate minces no words in detailing how powerful politicians sell out to bankers]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The headline on today's <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/12/AR2010081206356.html">Elizabeth Warren profile in the Washington Post,</a> "Elizabeth Warren, likely to head new consumer agency, provokes strong feelings," is titillating supporters of the feisty opponent of Wall Street. But while digging up an interesting handful of biographical nuggets to add to the growing corpus of Warren arcana, reporter Brady Dennis doesn't offer any meaningful evidence to support that prediction -- other than that <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/elizabeth_warren/index.html">Warren</a> was spotted visiting the White House on Thursday afternoon.</p><p>Dennis also writes that to her opponents, Warren is a "power-hungry headline seeker ... a fiery zealot disguised in professorial glasses and pastel cardigans," but only backs up that overheated rhetoric with a nasty quote -- "I get disgusted every time I hear her speak" --&#160; that was originally reported by <a href="http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2010/07/27/wall_street_fear_and_loathing_of_elizabeth_warren">Reuters a couple of weeks ago.</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/08/13/warren_clinton_and_dodd/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/13/warren_clinton_and_dodd/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Democrats&#8217; Worst Week Ever not looking so bad now</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/11/democrats_day_from_hell/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/11/democrats_day_from_hell/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 17:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/08/11/democrats_day_from_hell</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The media flipped out when three Democrats announced their retirements in early January]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the wake of yesterday's primary elections in Connecticut and Colorado, it's worth revisiting the first week in January, when -- in the same 24-hour period -- word leaked that Chris Dodd, Connecticut's five-term Democratic senator, and Bill&#160;Ritter, Colorado's Democratic governor, would not be seeking reelection this year. And in that same window, North Dakota Democrat Byron Dorgan also decided not to run for another Senate term.</p><p>Faced with this confluence of Democratic retirements, the instant and overwhelming pundit consensus was that terrified Democrats were <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/01/democrats-are-dropping-like-flies.html">fleeing the battlefield in panic</a> and that a wave of retirements <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/politicaljunkie/2010/01/dorgan_ritter_and_now_dodd_a_d.html">would soon follow</a>, creating new and unexpected openings for Republicans to pick up congressional seats and governorships. "Democrats are dropping like flies," ABC's The Note <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/01/democrats-are-dropping-like-flies.html">declared</a>.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/08/11/democrats_day_from_hell/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/11/democrats_day_from_hell/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Halter only one of the &#8220;replacements&#8221; who could save Dems</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/24/democrats_2010_secret_weapon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/24/democrats_2010_secret_weapon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 18:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arlen Specter vs. Joe Sestak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arlen Specter, D-Pa.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blanche L. Lincoln, D-Ark.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blanche Lincoln vs. Bill Halter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joe Sestak, D-Pa.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/05/24/democrats_2010_secret_weapon</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a handful of races, the party has replaced doomed incumbents on the ballot. And the results are encouraging]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here's one simple way for Democrats to enjoy a better-than-expected November: throw out their own incumbents before the voters get the chance to. In some of this year's marquee races, the party has done just that, and the early results are encouraging.</p><p>Take the crucial Pennsylvania Senate contest, where Republican Pat Toomey essentially spent the last year running ahead of Arlen Specter, who had been the presumed Democratic nominee. The Democrats who were propping up Specter <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/29/rendell-sestak-would-get_n_209285.html">insisted he would be the party's best general election bet</a>, even though his 30 years in the Senate seemed to clash with the public's anti-incumbent mood. Specter, of course, lost last week's Democratic primary to Joe Sestak -- and Sestak has, at least in the initial post-primary polling, <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-13600-Philadelphia-Opinion-Polls-Examiner~y2010m5d21-Poll-Sestak-leads-Toomey-4642-in-first-major-survey-since-Tuesday-primaries">opened a small lead</a> over Toomey.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/05/24/democrats_2010_secret_weapon/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/24/democrats_2010_secret_weapon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chris Dodd effectively kills Blanche Lincoln&#8217;s derivatives proposal</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/dodd_kills_derivatives_ban/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/dodd_kills_derivatives_ban/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 22:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blanche L. Lincoln, D-Ark.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blanche Lincoln vs. Bill Halter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/05/18/dodd_kills_derivatives_ban</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's the Senate at its finest: Everyone gets to vote for a compromise that sounds good but does nothing]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here's Chris Dodd's face-saving solution to the Blanche Lincoln derivatives reform pickle: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/18/AR2010051804100.html?hpid=topnews">say we'll still ban banks from trading derivatives</a>, but not until after a "review" by a council of regulators. And then, in two years, we kill the whole thing and pretend it never happened. Everyone wins! (In the traditional US Senate sense of everyone winning, which means no one has to take a tough vote and nothing is accomplished.)</p><p>Polls in Arkansas don't close until 8:30 pm ET, but most observers are already predicting that a June 8 runoff election between Senator Blanche Lincoln and challenger Bill Halter will be necessary. Meanwhile, Lincoln's left-pleasing derivatives-regulating amendment to the Senate bank overhaul bill was supposed to bolster her support with the Democratic base, so it couldn't be killed until she won or lost her primary.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/dodd_kills_derivatives_ban/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/dodd_kills_derivatives_ban/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can a backroom deal on bank reform be stopped?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/banking_reform_comes_down_to_the_wire/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/banking_reform_comes_down_to_the_wire/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 19:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/05/18/banking_reform_comes_down_to_the_wire</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The legislative dance is more transparent than ever. But that doesn't mean tough new rules on derivatives are safe]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Harry Reid <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37372.html">has filed for cloture</a> on <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/bank_reform/index.html">bank reform,</a> meaning that a final vote on the Dodd financial regulation bill, as amended after several weeks of Senate debate, could happen this week -- possibly even as early as Wednesday. That prospect seems a bit unlikely, however, given that there is some significant work yet to be done on one of the critical issues left remaining: how to properly regulate derivatives trading.</p><p>The biggest question right now: whether bank holding companies and other financial institutions that take advantage of various forms of federal support should be allowed to trade derivatives. As it stands right now, the Dodd bill includes Sen. Blanche Lincoln's notoriously strong proposal requiring bank holding companies to completely spin off their derivatives trading operations.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/banking_reform_comes_down_to_the_wire/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/18/banking_reform_comes_down_to_the_wire/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Banking reform surprise: Not gutted yet</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/13/banking_reform_marches_forward/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/13/banking_reform_marches_forward/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 17:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/05/13/banking_reform_marches_forward</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a virtuoso display of moderate, incremental progress, the Dodd bill lumbers toward a vote]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The most surprising news about <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/bank_reform/index.html">banking reform's progress</a> through the Senate is that Sen. Blanche Lincoln's proposal to strip derivatives trading from the big banks is still intact. Excising that provision is now the top priority for banking lobbyists, but so far they've made no apparent headway. On Wednesday, an amendment designed to do Wall Street's bidding, sponsored by Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R.-Ga., went down to defeat. A final vote could happen as early as next week, raising at least the possibility that the Dodd bill might have a significant impact on how JP Morgan Chase et al. do business.</p><p>But something else is scheduled for next week -- Sen. Blanche Lincoln's Arkansas primary, in which she has been challenged from the left by state Attorney General Bill Halter. According to a story by Carrie Budoff-Brown in Politico, Senate Democrats may be holding off any action to weaken the derivatives language <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37170.html">until after Tuesday's primary.</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/05/13/banking_reform_marches_forward/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/13/banking_reform_marches_forward/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Did the GOP just cave on bank reform?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/04/28/banking_reform_break_through/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/04/28/banking_reform_break_through/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard C. Shelby, R-Ala.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/04/28/banking_reform_break_through</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The media is already declaring victory for Democrats, but if Wall Street got what it wanted, the glee is premature]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Numerous media outlets are reporting that the GOP has decided to end its filibuster and allow debate to begin on the Dodd banking reform bill, after, <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/republican_party/index.html?story=/news/feature/2010/04/28/us_financial_overhaul_7">reports the AP,</a>&#160; Republican Sen. Richard Shelby announced that he had received "assurances that Democrats will adjust [the] banking regulation bill to address concerns that it perpetuates bailouts."</p><p>Time's Jay Newtown-Small was quick to label the decision <a href="http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/04/28/republicans-cave-on-financial-reform-debate-to-begin/">a Republican "cave."</a> If true, that's something of a stunner: The Democrats <a href="http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2010/04/28/banking_reform_all_nighter/index.html">threaten to keep the Republicans up all night,</a> and minutes later, the GOP waves the white flag.</p><p>But it's quite possible that the <em>opposite</em> is true -- that it's the Democrats who caved. We don't have enough details&#160; yet to be sure, but if the assurances that Shelby received from Dodd included a decision to drop the $50 billion bank "orderly liquidation fund," then the real winners here are the GOP and the banks.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/04/28/banking_reform_break_through/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/04/28/banking_reform_break_through/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A citizen&#8217;s short guide to reforming Wall Street</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/04/20/wall_street_reform_ext2010/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/04/20/wall_street_reform_ext2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion//feature/2010/04/20/wall_street_reform_ext2010</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In order to ensure that the financial meltdown is not repeated, the Dodd bill needs to consider three policies]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The real scandal isn&#8217;t Wall Street&#8217;s unlawful acts (i.e., Securities and Exchange Commission vs. Goldman Sachs) but legal acts that have reaped the Street a bonanza and nearly sunk the rest of us.</p><p>It&#8217;s good we finally have an SEC on which three out of five commissioners are willing to enforce laws already on the books. Hopefully other enforcement agencies (CFTC, FDIC, and the Fed) will follow suit. But we also need to make illegal the recklessness that&#8217;s now legal.</p><p>The Dodd bill now being considered in the Senate is a step in the right direction. Yet despite the hype, it&#8217;s a very modest step. It leaves out three of the most important things necessary to prevent a repeat of the Wall Street meltdown.</p><p>1. Require that trading of <strong>all</strong> derivatives be done on open exchanges where parties have to disclose what they&#8217;re buying and selling and have enough capital to pay up if their bets go wrong. The exception in the current bill for so-called unique derivatives opens up a loophole big enough for bankers to drive their Ferraris through.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/04/20/wall_street_reform_ext2010/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/04/20/wall_street_reform_ext2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Getting the bankers out of the Fed</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/16/jamie_dimon_and_the_federal_reserve_bank/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/16/jamie_dimon_and_the_federal_reserve_bank/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/03/16/jamie_dimon_and_the_federal_reserve_bank</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[See ya later, Jamie Dimon. Under the Dodd bill, bankers will no longer be able to choose their own supervisors]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pack up your bags, Jamie Dimon. The CEO of JPMorgan Chase currently serves as <a href="http://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/org_nydirectors.html">a Class A director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York,</a> which is awfully convenient, considering that the FRBNY is charged with supervising his bank. But if Sen. Chris Dodd's proposed "Restoring American Financial Stability Act" emerges from the legislative grinder intact, Dimon and other Wall Street bankers will no longer have a near-automatic seat on the regulatory body charged with watching over them.</p><p><a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/60de3ad0-3059-11df-bc4a-00144feabdc0.html">The Financial Times' Tom Braithwaite</a> dropped this intriguing bomb:</p><blockquote>
<p>The new proposal would bar appointments of Wall Street bankers as directors at the New York Fed.</p>
</blockquote><p>I hadn't seen this news elsewhere, and it took a little digging to find the relevant text in the <a href="http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/AYO09D44_xml.pdf">bill.</a> And having done so, it's unclear that the bill specifies exactly what the FT is reporting.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/03/16/jamie_dimon_and_the_federal_reserve_bank/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/16/jamie_dimon_and_the_federal_reserve_bank/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dodd&#8217;s bank reform bill lumbers into view</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/15/restoring_american_financial_stability_act/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/15/restoring_american_financial_stability_act/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/03/15/restoring_american_financial_stability_act</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Senate Banking Committee gets a week to digest the 1,336-page bill before marking it up. Good luck with that]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., released his long-awaited draft of a new financial regulatory <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/bank_reform/">bank reform</a> bill on Monday. It is 1,336 pages long, which means, unless you want to crib from the <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/03/15/factsheet-senate-financial-regulation-bill/">"factsheet"</a> summary released by the Senate Banking Committee, that it will probably require another couple of hours before the <a href="http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/">regulation geeks</a> can tell us exactly what is inside this monster. (The early word: The Fed will get <em>more</em> power.)</p><p>One section likely to be of great interest to both the banking industry and its critics starts on page 492 of the "Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010": Title VII, "Improvement to Regulation of Over-the-Counter Derivatives. "</p><p>I'm working my way through it, but I was caught up short right at the start. In Subtitle A: "Regulation of Swap Markets," Section 711: "Definitions," part (a): "Amendments to Definitions in the Commodity Exchange Act," sub-section (2), the Act provides a five part definition of what kinds of derivatives are considered "swaps." Part three is characterized by a certain mad financial poetry.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/03/15/restoring_american_financial_stability_act/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/15/restoring_american_financial_stability_act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chris Dodd backbone alert</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/11/dodd_and_financial_reform/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/11/dodd_and_financial_reform/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Corker, R-Tenn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/03/11/dodd_and_financial_reform</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For the second time, the senator ditches the GOP on bank reform and says Dems will go it alone]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is Chris Dodd up to? On Thursday, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking Committee announced that he will unveil his version of a financial regulatory reform package next Monday, without, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/business/12regulate.html?hp">reports the New York Times</a>, "yet having a single Republican endorsement."</p><p>Negotiations with Tennessee Republican Bob Corker appear to have broken down, possibly over the issue of <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/10/AR2010031003919.html">whether payday lenders should be regulated</a> by a proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency.</p><p>Sound familiar? Just one month ago, Dodd announced <a href="http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2010/02/05/bank_reform_impasse/index.html">that bipartisan talks were at an "impasse"</a> and Democrats would go it alone. Back then, Alabama Republican Sen. Richard Shelby played the role of recalcitrant GOPer. But then, a few days later, word trickled out that Dodd had started negotiating with Corker.</p><p>Who's next?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/03/11/dodd_and_financial_reform/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/11/dodd_and_financial_reform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The best politician is a nervous one</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/06/public_opinion/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/06/public_opinion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jim Bunning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion//feature/2010/03/05/public_opinion</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bunning, Dodd give the lie to the Beltway elite view that Washington is too responsive to public opinion]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When you look past the craziness, chaos and confusion of politics these days, you still find roughly two major schools of thought that aim to explain What's Fundamentally Wrong.</p><p>The first says America is paralyzed by a political system that is too democratic -- too responsive to citizens' whims. This is the religion of almost everyone in the permanent Washington elite, regardless of party. Its canon mixing paeans to noblesse oblige with shrill authoritarianism is most clearly articulated by high priests like the Washington Post's David Broder and the New York Times' Tom Friedman. The former has said democracy threatens to make "official Washington altogether too responsive to public opinion"; the latter dreams of Chinese-style dictatorship.</p><p>"One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages," Friedman recently gushed, adding that the chief "advantage" is the ability of despots to "just impose" policies at the barrel of a gun.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/03/06/public_opinion/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/03/06/public_opinion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Excellent news: Dodd gives up on the GOP</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/05/bank_reform_impasse/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/05/bank_reform_impasse/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/02/05/bank_reform_impasse</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Finally, a sign of progress in the Senate's effort to pass financial reform: The Dems will go it alone]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A sign of backbone from Chris Dodd?</p><p>Congressional Quarterly reports:</p><blockquote>
<p>Bipartisan negotiations over a financial regulatory overhaul are at an "impasse," Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher J. Dodd said Friday, adding " have instructed my staff to begin drafting legislation to present to the committee later this month.The Connecticut Democrat said in a statement that while the panel's ranking Republican, Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, "assured me that he is still committed to finding a consensus ... it is time to move the process forward."</p>
</blockquote><p>Translation: The Republicans are refusing to budge on their determination to block any meaningful reform. And why not? They've made the political calculation that preventing the Obama administration from governing is their best electoral strategy -- and it's been working like a charm.</p><p>But in our dysfunctional government, an "impasse" may actually be a sign of progress. Bipartisan consensus in this Congress is impossible. Now is the time to bring a solid bill to the floor, and force Republicans to filibuster. If the Democrats want to have any chance of salvaging the midterm elections, they need to show voters that they are willing to fight.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/02/05/bank_reform_impasse/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/05/bank_reform_impasse/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who&#8217;s killing financial reform?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/04/financial_reform_ext2010/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/04/financial_reform_ext2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Bailouts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion//feature/2010/02/04/financial_reform_ext2010</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Call me old-fashioned, but I thought Congress was in charge of passing legislation, not Wall Street]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Senator Chris Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, scolded Wall Street representatives at a hearing Thursday for sending &#8220;an army of lobbyists whose only mission is to kill the common-sense financial reforms&#8221; needed by the public. &#8220;The fact is,&#8221; Dodd said, &#8220;I am frustrated, and so are the American people.&#8221; He charged that Wall Street&#8217;s intransigence was the reason for Congress&#8217;s failure to pass any bill to regulate the Street. &#8220;The refusal of large financial firms to work constructively with Congress on this effort borders on insulting to the American people who have lost so much in this crisis.&#8221;</p><p>In other words, it isn&#8217;t Congress&#8217;s fault. It isn&#8217;t the Senate Banking Committee&#8217;s fault. It certainly isn&#8217;t Dodd&#8217;s fault. The reason more than a year has passed since the biggest bailout in the history of the world and nothing has been done to prevent a repeat performance -- even as the biggest banks are doling out more than $30 billion of bonuses, even as Goldman Sachs is awarding its big traders $16 billion in bonuses (more than the $13 billion Goldman collected from taxpayers via the bailout of AIG), even as AIG itself is handing out bonuses -- the reason is &#8230; what, exactly, Senator? Because the Street has sent an army of lobbyists to Capitol Hill?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/02/04/financial_reform_ext2010/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/04/financial_reform_ext2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chris Dodd to GOP: I surrender</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/02/dodd_waves_white_flag_on_reform/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/02/dodd_waves_white_flag_on_reform/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Volcker]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2010/02/02/dodd_waves_white_flag_on_reform</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Senate Banking Committee chairman misplaces spine, declares he wants "bipartisan support" for regulatory reform]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul Volcker is scheduled to appear before the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday afternoon <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2010/02/02/paul-volckers-prepared-testimony-on-prop-trading-proposal/">to explain his proposal to limit risk-taking by commercial banks</a> -- the so-called Volcker Rule that would ban banks from engaging in proprietary trading with federally insured depositor money.</p><p>But if <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/76c55844-0f4b-11df-8a19-00144feabdc0,dwp_uuid=e8477cc4-c820-11db-b0dc-000b5df10621.html">the Financial Times is to be trusted,</a> the Volcker Rule is already dead on arrival, because Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican senator on the Banking Committee, doesn't like it, the Democrats no longer have 60 votes, and Chris Dodd, the chairman of the committee, wants to play nice.</p><p>Don't read any further if you have blood pressure issues.</p><p>From the FT:</p><blockquote>
<p>A Dodd staffer said the senator is likely to quietly drop or modify many of the recommendations in the Volcker rule to ensure Republican support for regulatory reform.</p>
<p>"Chris is retiring so he wants to end his career with an important regulatory reform bill and he wants to make the bill bipartisan," the staffer said. "He is not going to risk bipartisan support to make the White House happy."</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/02/02/dodd_waves_white_flag_on_reform/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/02/02/dodd_waves_white_flag_on_reform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dodd: Time to put off healthcare &#8220;for a month, six weeks&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/01/22/dodd_12/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/01/22/dodd_12/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Healthcare Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/01/22/dodd</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Senior Democratic senator suggests it's time to "take a breather" on the issue]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, remember when Congress was going to finish healthcare reform legislation sometime, oh, last summer? Yeah. Didn't quite happen. And then when they were going to finish it before the end of the year? Oh, and remember when they were hoping to have it done before President Obama delivered the State of the Union, now scheduled to take place last week?</p><p>At a certain point, I guess, you start figuring:&#160;Hey, we're already months late, what's another month or two? That must be it, because even with the midterm elections creeping ever closer, senior Congressional Democrats are sounding very casual about the pace at which things are proceeding now.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/01/22/dodd_12/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/01/22/dodd_12/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

