General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSenator Elizabeth Warren May Not Be Appointed to the Banking Committee
Last edited Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:34 PM - Edit history (1)
Imagine that, Democrats working against her. If she doesn't make the Committee, we will all know who is in control of the Senate.
Warrens resume makes her a perfect fit for the committee. Her tenure as chair of the Congressional TARP oversight panel gave her a clear view of the intersection of the financial sector and government. In that post she distinguished herself as an independent thinker and critic of both the Obama administration and of banking practices.
Yet we have Senator Jack Reed, a senior Democrat who sits on the Senate Banking Committee, telling Reuters that he wont make a prediction about whether Warren will get on the committee. Other Senators wont comment. Harry Reid is staying silent on the matter.
(snip)
Behind the scenes there are people working to keep her off the committee. A former Senate aide tells me that the banking committee staff does not like Warren and have begun to quietly campaign against her. Lobbyists are telling senior Democrats that Warren might be more effective on the Judiciary Committee, which does bankruptcy oversight.
The staff of the Banking Committee is extremely tight with lobbyists for the banks, many of whom are former members of that staff. The staffers and lobbyists socialize together, drink together, and sometimes even marry. They are elitists who think of themselves as a cut above other Capitol Hill aides. And they pretty much all want jobs at banks someday.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49762821/Elizabeth_Warren_May_Not_Make_the_Banking_Committee
DURHAM D
(32,610 posts)allowed their big fat egos to override common sense.
m*therf**kers !
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)That committee is run by the Money Party, some of whom wear the D brand and others who ride for the R outfit.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)global1
(25,257 posts)with the Dems.
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)ejbr
(5,856 posts)coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)succeed in saying 'Good Bye' to me once and for all and I will not look back. Silly fuckers.
On edit: However, keeping her off the BC will give her more time to run for Prez in 2016 on a "Nationalize the TBTF Banks" platform.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)Are the dems fighting for the middle class? Remember that the President did not fight for her previously.
Call your elected officials. Call the President. It is time to force their actions to match their rhetoric.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)We all better get busy and call Reid's office to demand she be placed on the Banking Committee. It's time to bust up the cozy nest egg the banking committee staff have created for themselves.
kooljerk666
(776 posts)Flat out NO SUPPORT, zero, zilch, nada, NOTHING & Primary opponents too.
Senate Banking committee.
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/committees.tt?commid=sbank
juajen
(8,515 posts)We have the power! Break down that damned wall! Write, call and make lots of noise. We are not through.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)kick
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)ring any bells for you? Harry Reid is the Senate Majority Leader because he won't upset anyone, Max Baucus still chairs the Senate Finance committee, and so on. This is why just having a 'D' after your name doesn't matter as much as we like to pretend.
Kos' mission is to elect more and better Democrats, it's better part we have yet to achieve.
Teamster Jeff
(1,598 posts)"And the banks -- hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created -- are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place."
It was true then and it's true today
dmosh42
(2,217 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)I don't believe he'll spend one iota of his political capital on this. He's banker friendly.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Daniel537
(1,560 posts)This from the same leadership that tossed out the public option on day one to protect the interests of the insurance companies, now they want to protect the banks. Gee, what a shocker.
EmeraldCityGrl
(4,310 posts)better understand that pronto. Just like Reid to undermine an opportunity for some real change
in the Banking industry. I can't stand him.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)That pretty much tells us everything we need to know about Governmental oversight of this industry.
Amonester
(11,541 posts)Call, Write, on Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, and so on.
pa28
(6,145 posts)Lobbyists are telling senior Democrats. Let that sink in.
kooljerk666
(776 posts)Eliz. Warren would be a good fit on banking.
I spoke with Tim Johnson d- SD chairman & Harry Reed's office & told them "screw us around & 2014 will be like 2010".
Then I pointed out in OH, PA & CT GOPs (senate) with $100,000,000 between them lost & money does not matter anymore, we have our own sources of info & brainwashing is dead.
At any rate if the lobbyists do not like Warren, then get another job.
Tim Johnson the chairman has an election in 2014.
amborin
(16,631 posts)lalalu
(1,663 posts)We need new democratic blood in congress. Some of these longtime democrats are almost as bad as republicans. Schumer will personally block any changes to the financial industry.
Here it comes
marmar
(77,084 posts)nt
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)remove the gag & blinders that many of us assumed a year or so ago in order not to harm the President's re-election chances by scrutinizing the failings of the administration or trumpeting them to the world.
and get back to our noble Progressive task of monitoring the Democrats and keeping up the leftward pressure.
For starters, no "bargains" on Social Security, and none that hurt Medicare recipients. I got no problem with increased efficiency through bargaining on drug prices or provider price controls, but nothing that harms the recipients.