Senator Schumer Hearts More Regulation
With the stock market plunging to twelve-year lows today, it was easy to overlook this tidbit of financial/political news:
The word “ironic” doesn’t really begin to capture the idea of Senator Schumer being the one making that announcement, because during all the years of bubbles building and banking bonuses and finance finagling that eventually brought us to the economic brink where we stand now, it was Senator Schumer standing strongest and tallest against… more government regulation of banking and finance. NOW he thinks it’s a good idea to tighten the screws. Thanks, Chuck.
Having Senator Schumer be the point man to crack down on finance and investment abuses is a little like appointing A-Rod to root out steroid use in Major League Baseball. It just doesn’t come naturally to him. In fact, just two years ago, when some people on the inside were already seeing the finance world starting to come undone, Schumer issued a report actually complaining about TOO MUCH regulation by the government, and how it was putting financiers in New York at a competitive disadvantage with other financial capitols like London. And yet this morning, with no apparent sense of shame or apology at an event sponsored by Crain’s New York Business, Schumer led the regulatory call to arms:
It seems to me we could have “gotten in ahead” of the current disaster if a call for tougher regulation had been made by the Senator two years ago, instead of him doing the exact opposite. A display of gall like this would be funny if it weren’t so serious.
Of course, it’s easy to, shall we say, follow the evolution of his thinking from the late ‘90’s to now. Chuck Schumer was the senator from Goldman Sachs, hitting up all of New York City’s biggest financial companies and banks for massive campaign contributions. Look at these figures from the website opensecrets.org of Schumer’s biggest contributors during the first half of the decade:
Top 5 Contributors, 2001-2006Goldman Sachs
$182,590
JP Morgan Chase & Co
$129,800
Merrill Lynch
$127,000
Bear Stearns
$126,400
Citigroup Inc
$111,550
Top 5 Industries, 2001-2006Securities & Investment
$2,651,700
Lawyers/Law Firms
$2,004,721
Real Estate
$1,532,248
Commercial Banks
$549,249
Retired
$530,250
Keep in mind also, Schumer was head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, charged with raising money and directing candidacies for senate hopefuls across the country. And he did a damn good job. Democrats gained at least 13-seats in the Senate, where Schumer is now the third-ranking member of the party. He did very well… all except for the part about the seeds of America’s current financial disaster being planted while he was telling regulators to leave his guys alone.
Senator Schumer runs for re-election in 2010. I’m sure the conventional wisdom is that he’ll waltz to victory, with little significant opposition. But whoever decides to oppose him should hammer away on this matter. Of course, by that time, Schumer might be the virtual poster boy for tougher regulation. Say what you will about politicians – the good ones are… flexible.
One other note worth mentioning; Schumer actually had a partner on that report two years ago, the one complaining of overregulation. Mayor Bloomberg was in on it, also, and supported the findings. You know, Mayor Bloomberg… the billionaire who’s such an expert on finance and the economy that he had to override term limits because only he can fix the city’s economic problems.
Comments: 8
Jim, at least you're a liberal with open eyes and ears! You called it perfectly on this guy. Now I can even better comprehend his aggressive cheerleading for the Gillibrand selection. She is the perfect diversion for serious Republican opposition next year, while he can slip by unnoticed, and virtually unopposed. In a state with exactly TWO prominent Republicans, and THREE statewide offices up for election, Chuck has figured it out - leave the other two as the tempting targets while he waltzes through! If Peter or Rudy were to take him on while passing up Gilly or Paterson, I'd be as shocked as Schumer. But, we shall see.
Let the free markets be free, no more government intervention. I think with more regulatory risk and country risk the global economy will slow down more.
Let the free markets be free, no more government intervention. I think with more regulatory risk and country risk the global economy will slow down more.
I would like to see Rudy take on Schumer. Time will tell with this issue. Schumer has placed himself in a good position, as you said Jim, these guys can be "flexible".
Schumer will win in 2010, if he doesn't get any strong opposition. The economy should be better than it is now? Haha.
Also, Mayor Bloomberg should seek a third term? Why not give another candidate a chance. Is it possible that we need CHANGE?
These big buck charmers don't sit right in my book. There time should be up.
I am rooting for Rudy.
Lee
I'm not sure how this would work, but if Bloomberg wants another term as mayor, why couldn't Guiliani run for mayor again.
I was disappointed when he let the senate seat go to Hillary, but I know he was ill and also had marital woes.
I like Rudy a lot and would like to see more of him. I was also hoping that he would run for President someday.
A big fan of Mr. Guiliani!
Lee
Sometimes I look at the "Red States" as being out of touch with modern reality. But then I'm awakened from this delusion by the sounds of Chuck Schumer (perhaps the biggest horse's patootie the Senate has ever seen) bloviating on and on during yet ANOTHER Sunday press conference (you know, slow news day, easy to get a camera crew out), and I realize we are ALL to blame for this political mess. I mean, WE keep on electing the Schumers and the Lautenbergs (they still wheel his corpse out occasionally, no?) over and over again.
Is it any wonder the "Red States" look at US as being totally out of touch?
Oh well, as long as the "winner" is the one who can muster the most yard signs and run the most damaging negative TV ads (truth be damned, there's an election to be won!), we get EXACTLY what we deserve.
Once again Chuck Schumer is unmasked as the total fraud he is. One of the great media hogs in New York politics, he never misses an opportunity to try and sieze any small bit of cheap public attention. During 9/11 he tried to get himself in every photo of Rudy, a guy he otherwise opposed with ridicule, so close that he was nearly standing inside Rudy's jacket pocket. But hey, if your Chuck you try to get the most out of every photo op. His shameful conduct at the confirmation hearings for the Chief Justice where he came off as the fool he is, is just an other example. Chuck complains the loudest about Republicans allowing the financial meltdown while ignoring not only his shameful conduct described here but the Dems opposition to regulating Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac (the 2 institutions at the heart of the housing/financial meltdown)proposed by the Bush Administration. Of course those 2 agencies contributed massive sums to Dems and was also the dumping ground for old Clinton appointees who garnered millions in the very kinds of bonuses Chuck complains about now. Thanks for offering this true side of our less than outstanding senator.Sadly in typical knee-jerk voting, Chuck will glide to re-election in 2010 without any real examination of his record and with the glowing endorsement of the New York Times(which probably has already written it).
Your brave Mr.Watkins. Mark my words your days are numbered. Ultimately the masses think there is a difference between a supposed liberal like Schumer and a supposed conservate like Alabama senator Shelby who is the ranking Republican on the Senate Banking Committee. But if you scratch beneath the surface they are both servants of the same paymaster. The media is focusing on the the so called mortgage meltdown. The real cause of the crisis was that the wall street firms were selling insurance and not calling it insurance (instead they called it CDOs and CDSs etc.) thereby avoiding the stringent insurance laws but the media is not talking about it. I wonder why? Senators Christopher Dodd, Tim Johnson, Jack Reed, Michael Bennet, Richard Shelby, Bob Bennett, Jim Bunning etc. are all the same and loyal to the same paymaster. The Republican and Democrat titles are just for show to fool the masses. The very wall street workers that caused this disaster are still the beloved of the political class in Washington but they won't ever say that out loud. Why not appoint a smart Asian economics professor from Stanford as Secratary of Treasury. Instead Geithner and Summers are appointed. Thats like appointing AROD to police Steroids. Why do you think that is? This type of unbridled corruption will insurance that China will replace us by the end of this century.