Boring Blather about Biden, Bankruptcy Bills, and Big Banking Bucks

I am only posting this discussion because it is a complicated topic on which there has been much misinformation posted here.

But I warn you this is a boring discussion which most of you would be well advised not to waste your time reading.

If you have chosen a candidate to support in the primary and are not amenable to reconsideration, you need not read any further.

If you have not chosen a candidate, but you are not considering Biden as a potential option, you need not read any further.

If you remain undecided or at least persuadable, and you would potentially consider Biden as a candidate who you might support, I am writing this message to you because there has been some incorrect information about Biden, his relationship with the credit card industry, and the bankruptcy bills vetoed in 2000 and passed in 2005.

THE BANKRUPTCY BILLS PASSED IN 2005 AND VETOED IN 2000

Like nearly all legislation supported by the Bush administration, there is keen irony in the title of the Bankruptcy "Abuse" Prevention and Consumer "Protection" Act of 2005.

Make no mistake, the Act was passed to address a completely phony "crisis" of "bankruptcy abuse" (the only "bankruptcy crisis" was the crisis of increasing bankruptcies sought by good tax-paying citizens whose financial collapse was precipitated by exploding health care costs and by single parents who ex-spouses had reneged on their child support obligations). Likewise, this Act did nothing to "protect" consumers; it was a pure giveaway to the Credit Card industry at the expense of the most vulnerable American consumers (disproportionately affecting racial minorities at five times the rate of other Americans).

All the Republicans in the Senate voted for this hideous law, and they were joined by 18 Democrats (Baucus, Bayh, Biden, Bingaman, Byrd, Carper, Conrad, Inouye, Johnson, Kohl, Landrieu, Lincoln, Nelson, Nelson, Pryor, Reid, Salazar, and Stabenow).

But that's not the worst of it. There were numerous amendments to the law proposed by Democrats to make the bill less anti-consumer, and Biden voted against most of them.

Biden rejected Kennedy's amendment to preserve the old bankruptcy protections for people who had been bankrupted by medical expenses.

Biden rejected Akaka's amendment to require the Credit Card industry to fuller disclosure of the risks of bankruptcy from overextended credit.

Biden rejected Durbin's amendment to preserve the old bankruptcy protections for people serving in the military.

Biden rejected Fiengold's amendment to protect the homes of the elderly from foreclosure.

Biden sat through the debate on other equally significant amendments and then didn't vote either way on those unsuccessful amendments.

Some people inevitably attempt to defend all of these anti-consumer votes by trying to confuse the Bankruptcy "Abuse" Prevention and Consumer "Protection" Act of 2005 with the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2000, which was a substantially different law that Bill Clinton vetoed. For example, the Senate version of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2000 had a provision to protect the first $100,000 in home equity from foreclosure and, more importantly, it included poison pill making bankruptcy unavailable to those who incurred their debt by being fined for illegally protesting abortion clinics. The 2000 bill was only passed by a procedural trick that stripped these key provisions, and this was the specific reason it received a pocket veto.

Given the many different amendments to the bankruptcy bill vetoed in 2000 and the bankruptcy law passed in 2005, you cannot claim that a vote for one is the same as a vote for the other.


BIG BUCKS FROM THE CREDIT CARD INDUSTRY

Through the 2006 campaign cycle, the two Democratic Senators (or House Members, for that matter) who had received the most financing from the Credit Card industry were

1. Tom Carper (Biden's protege), who had received $315,422, and

2. Joe Biden, who had received $285,250.

Subsequently, Biden has raised well more than enough to surpass his protege Carper in terms of fund raising from the Credit Card industry.

For comparison during this time period through the 2006, Hillary had received $109,030, not more than Biden as some have suggested. For further comparison, Obama raised $40,925 and Edwards raised $7,950 from the Credit Card industry during this time frame.

It is a similar story on money from lobbyists: Hillary Clinton has raised the most at $427,950, Chris Dodd next at $181,925, and Joe Biden third most of all Democratic candidates at $94,760, but as a percentage of the total amount they have raised, the percentage is more than twice as high for Biden and Dodd as compared to Hillary. Whether Hillary has also surpassed Biden in total contributions from the Credit Card industry remains to be determined, but she will never catch him in terms of the high percentage of support that Biden receives from the Credit Card industry and if Hillary passes him in total funds that will only be because she's raised more than ten times as much as Biden, with that disparity growing daily.

I'm no fan of Hillary's, but it is simply inaccurate to down play Biden's support from the Credit Card industry while playing up her funding from that industry.

if those amendments had passed, and it is outrageous that they didn't, it would be far more acceptable.

I knew all this but it is awesome to see it presented in this way. The bankruptcy bill has destroyed a lot of people I know personally. And although Biden makes a nice showing with all his tears and debating, I can't get past the fact that he sold us out when he voted for this bill.

from yours. S/he believes that had this not passed, the State's economy would have been severely impacted. A large number of people are employed by the big "credit card banks". So Biden was actually doing what his constituents elected him to do - vote for their best interests. I don't like it, either, but I'm better informed as a result of that post of the "other side" of the debate.

just voting their perception of their constituents' best interest, too. I'm sure their states suffered some economic impact from ending slavery.

I want a president who leads, not one who follows the worst instincts of his corporate sponsors in the name of "constituent services".

a Biden supporter because that's how his vote was viewed.

I'm not supporting his vote, just giving another viewpoint.

I'm with you on what you want in a President -- 100%.

because it protects local jobs?

If Biden voted for the bankruptcy bill only to protect local jobs, and we agree that the bill was bad for America (even if we disagree whether it was bad for Delaware), do we further agree that Biden ought to denounce the bankruptcy bill now that he's running for President instead of Senator?

to support my family and all the additional resulting horrors, I don't know.

I honestly can't speak unless I'm in that position. I know how I BELIEVE I would respond, but until I'm actually 'there' it would be conjecture on my part.

What does "denounce" the bankruptcy bill mean? And I don't know if he should or shouldn't - nothing is that simple. I do know whoever gets into that office has to put the majority of the country first.

Again, a question I can't answer.

was given the right to foreclose on the home of an impoverished elderly person on a small fixed income is so ludicrous as to be offensive.

by outsourcing the careers of "only children", boomers now, who may have been sandwiched between the needs of an elderly and chronically ill but not yet dead WWII-entitled fixed income parent(s)and the educational needs of their children.

Try telling a well-loved surviving parent that he now gets $40 a month on which to "live" while his home and pension needs to be sacrificed for proximity to his medical decision-maker and the costliness of his care in one of those nasty places that accept MEDICAID. Can't do it - Spend it down, settle the person in a nicer private-pay place and make up the cost difference, and hope for the best. Tell them about how that great Family Leave Act wouldn't even provide protection for the caretaker's job in a pinch because the sole caretaker hasn't had a job for over a year but not for lack of trying while still being the almost daily patient caretaker/advocate, much less have one year's seniority.

How many persons, being basically optimistic and confident in their skills, leveraged homes (equity and/or value) for the education of their children and not for luxury vacations, house-flipping schemes, or new cars? How many filled out the FAFSA forms and loan apps, sent them in, waited and waited for their analysis to come back; met the loan criteria -- what a perfect way to collect a better picture of the personal and total family financial status of those they planned to strip of their assets. Let's see, what are the occupations of significant groups of our borrowers and students? IT, nursing, allied health professions, call center employees? - Voila! ('puter programs made that one a cinch). Outsource those occupations and/or bring on the H1Bs because no one here is qualified; churn the homes(hey, we can recycle this scheme in a few years), then get taxpayer-paid bail-outs. Oh, and raise tuition yet again at those state universities. Racketeering much!

Cant file for bankruptcy, as Hillary ships my kid off to Iran?:sarcasm: :puffpiece:

And I believe Hillary Clinton voted for this as well. Hummm

clear statement at the time that she would have voted against it, and the Act did not pass by just one vote (so her absence was both understandable and immaterial).

With that said, I'm not a big fan of Hillary's -- I just think this is one issue where she does not deserve criticism.

One of the reasons why I can't overlook Biden on this issue. It's sickening that this was passed, while the greedy CC companies where rubbing their palms together while salivating.

And it fucking passed! :puke:

and passed while the credit card co. are making record profits.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/interviews/warren.html

boon to the Predatory Credit Card industry and would have ameliorated the worst injustices, but Biden couldn't even get behind the mitigating amendments.