Comments for How Freddie Mac Halted Regulatory Drive Largely By Lobbying Republicans »
Posted By ybdogsct 12 months ago in Business & FinanceFreddie Mac and its sister company, Fannie Mae, are in financial collapse and under government control. Congress is investigating how it all happened.
Freddie Mac enlisted prominent conservatives, including Gingrich and former Justice Department official Viet Dinh, paying each $300,000 in 2006, according to internal records. In 2005, Freddie Mac hired Republican political consultant Frank Luntz.
Freddie Mac thwarted efforts to bring a tough regulatory bill sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel by secretly paying a Republican consulting firm, Washington-based DCI Group, $2 million to kill Hagel's legislation. The covert lobbying campaign targeted Republican senators in 2005-06. According to the newly obtained records, DCI's deployment was part of a broader campaign that targeted mainly Republicans on Capitol Hill. The internal Freddie Mac documents show that 17 of the lobbying firms and consultants paid in 2006 were specifically directed to focus on Republicans and four on Democrats.
Read Full Story at google.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 138 of 141 Comments
-
7%
Endoscopy12 months ago
-
97%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My mistake. If I knew how to unshare a story, I would as it is off-topic in the Islam Group.
Reply
Of course, applying your own standard, if you weren't interested in reading the story, you shouldn't have clicked the link and posted a comment.-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned3 Replies
-
-
83%
ADAGUY12 months ago
-
44%
4thchance12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WOW, this article didn't even mention Barney Frank or Chris Dodd...
Reply
The Fannie and Freddie collapse all happened under the watchful eyes of DEMOCRATS Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. You can go ahead and blame the Bush administration for it, but you know what. Bush can't keep his eyes on everything. Just like Obama will not be able to keep his eyes on everything. That's why they APPOINT people to keep theirs eyes on things for them. Democrats appointed Dodd and Frank to keep their eyes on Fannie and Freddie. THEY FAILED US MISERABLY. Now the entire country is paying for their incompetence. Dodd and Frank should be held accountable.
But they won't be, and that's why our country may soon fail. There is no justice anymore. No deterrent, all this theft and corruption crap will continue until we have nothing left. Dodd and Frank should be placed in prison. But instead, they won't even have to answer to anyone for what they have done. And now we are all paying for it. So now I ask, what's the next screw job going to be for us. You know it's coming, why shouldn't another good screw job be pulled on us, there's no penalty for people in high places to screw us. BRING IT ON...
See this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz-d6WPTXa8-
83%
jordan1112 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree that some democrats turned a blind eye. But there is no way on this earth you'll get away with spinning the republicans full on complicity in this, including deregulating the banking/lending industries. Republicans have brought our nation to the edge, and you'd best hope there's a way to fix it.
Reply-
40%
4thchance12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There has to be accountability, or this kind of crap will never end and surly will never be fixed. This happed on Democrat BARNEY FRANK'S watch. So like this article seems to be doing is to point the finger at someone other then who's at fault. Yep, that will get to the bottom of the problem won't it!?
Reply-
75%
b-happy12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is the fault of the American citizen voting in Democrats and Republicans that had no intention of trying to fix any problems but instead wanted to help out their corporate and elitist buddies. It's our fault because we vote these idiots in.
Reply
It's just amazing that a story like this blames Republicans when Obama himself is second most in how much money they have received from Fannie Mae. Or how about the fact that Obama has already hired people for his new administration that used to work for Fannie Mae? Where is that in this story?
So we get the government we deserve because we keep voting in people that screw us and only because they call themselves a Republican or a Democrat. WHat sense does that make? If people actually read facts about the people they support then we wouldn't have these idiots in office. Ben Franklin, Washington, Jefferson were the people and thus ran a government for the people. WHat we have now is a government that doesn't even know who the people are. All they know is that their kids and friends will be Ok.-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BHAPPY:
Reply
"when Obama himself is second most in how much money they have received from Fannie Mae. Or how about the fact that Obama has already hired people for his new administration that used to work for Fannie Mae? Where is that in this story?"
How does this make Obama responsible for the current collapse? Please post a direct link to nonpartisan documentation that proves a causal relationship between legislation Obama sponsored or defeated and the collapse of Freddie Mac.
I've already done so with Republicans Bill Frist, Phil Gramm, Richard Shelby, Doug Goodyear, etc.
Now it's your turn. Demonstrate the causl relationship and don't forget to provide direct links to your nonpartisan documentation. -
Neutral
amazed12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, not only do we insist on returning all the same people back to Washington, we even insist that everyone involved be career politicians.
Reply
Listen to the wailing going on about Caroline Kennedy's possible appointment to Hilary's seat. Nothing about her politics or where she stands or do we really need to keep the Kennedy legacy going, just "oh, she has no political experience!".
I think that's probably the best thing about her! We need MORE people to be elected to Congress with NO political experience -- as long as they have some real-life experience. If we could do away with the majority of the career politicians (which our founding fathers never wanted us to have, anyway) we could probably go along way towards cleaning this country up.
-
-
-
-
-
-
86%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
4THCHANCE:
Reply
"The Fannie and Freddie collapse all happened under the watchful eyes of DEMOCRATS Barney Frank and Chris Dodd."
That's because the Democrats did NOT control Congressional Banking Committees between 1995-2006. The Democrats were also NOT responsible for killing Hagel's bill (REPUBLICAN Bill Frist killed it in committee).
Why don't you try reading a little more and watching television a little less? You might actually learn something.
4THCHANCE:
"This happed on Democrat BARNEY FRANK'S watch."
Wrong. Republicans controlled Congress from 1995-2006. It was a Republican Majority Leader (Bill Frist) that killed Hagel's bill in committee. It was Republicans who resisted an alternative regulatory bill by Democrat Paul Sarbanes to reign in Freddie Mac.
Even in YOUR OWN YOUTUBE LINK, Bill O'Rielly agrees that Democrat Barney Frank passed legislation as soon as he was in the position to do so. Unfortunately, the bill was too late to stop the momentum of Freddie Mac's collapse.
FROM YOUR OWN LINK:
BARNEY FRANK: "I became chairman of the Banking Committee on January 31st 2007. Less than 2 months later, I did what the Republicans hadn't been able to do in 12 years -- get through the committee a very tough regulatory bill and it passed the House in May. I've always felt 2 things about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- that they had important roles to play but that their regulation should be improved. From 1995 to 2006 when the Republicans controlled Congress, no regulatory legislation was passed. The first time I had any real authority on this was January of 2007 and within 2 months we had passed a bill that regulated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The earliest chance we got to put tough regulation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we did it.
BILL O'RIELLY: "Ok. Alright, that's swell."
Furthermore, Democrats actually had proposed an alternative bill to regulate Freddie Mac, but that was also killed by Republicans.
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/532756-1.htm...
"During deliberations, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Alabama) dismissed the alternative submitted by ranking member Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)."
Is this really the best you can do?
LOL.-
50%
4thchance12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The BIG problem I have with Democrat Barney Frank is this.
Reply
Late last July, Frank made a public statement. Frank told us that Fannie and Freddie are in good shape, he re-assured us that Fannie and Freddie are good solid investments. Then a few weeks later Fannie and Freddie FAILED. Barney had to have known that Fannie and Freddie were in trouble. But he lied anyway. Before Frank made that statement, many of us who had stock in Fannie & Freddie were worried about those institutions. Then Frank comes out and reassures us that all is good. So, many like MYSELF hung onto those stocks, I and millions of others lost BILLIONS of dollars on those stocks that Barney said are good investments. My question is this.
WHY DID BARNEY LIE to us about all this???? He know they were in trouble, that was his job to know what is going on with Fannie and Freddie.
You can spin this till hell freezes over, but that does not explain why Democrat Barney Frank lied to us. Something stinks to high heaven with all this!?-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
4THCHANCE:
Reply
"The BIG problem I have with Democrat Barney Frank is this.
Late last July, Frank made a public statement. Frank told us that Fannie and Freddie are in good shape, he re-assured us that Fannie and Freddie are good solid investments. So, many like MYSELF hung onto those stocks, I and millions of others lost BILLIONS of dollars on those stocks."
1) What should Barney Frank have done? Are you telling me that it would have been fiscally wise for Barney Frank to have called a press conference predicting the imminent collapse of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? Such a press conference would CERTAINLY have brought upon the collapse of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae even sooner and would have panicked investors.
No, Frank specifically stated Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are "not the best investments to be made" and passed regulatory legislation within 2 months of taking power of the Banking Committee, hoping that the legislation would arrive in time to prevent Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's collapse. It turns out, it couldn''t stop Freddie Mac's momentum.
2) You should have listened more carefully. Barney Frank said the words "Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are not good investments."
FROM YOUR OWN YOUTUBE LINK:
Barney Frank: "Fannie and Freddie are not the best investments to be made."
3) YOU are responsible for YOUR OWN investments. There have been warnings since 2003 of Freddie Mac's instability, which is what led Republican Chuck Hagel to author his regulatory bill,Democrat Paul Sarbanes to author his regulatory bill, and Barney Frank to say that "Fannie and Freddie are not the best investments to be made" right now.
I find it laughable that your accusation has changed from "This happened on Barney Frank's watch!" to "Barney Frank's financial advice made me lose money!" -- as if you would ever take financial advice from a Democrat politician, much less Barney Frank.
It's certainly odd to see someone from the Republican Party blaming others for his poor investments. What happened to being the party of "personal responsibility"? I guess that only applies to others, huh?-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
PROTOHAM:
Reply
"Well of course they didn't have to lobby the dems, they were letting things happen without."
Actually, Chuck Hagel was not the only one to attempt to push regulatory legislation through the Republican-controlled Congress. The Democrats were supporting their own version of a regulatory bill that was authored by Democrat Paul Sarbanes. But Republicans killed both Chuck Hagel's and Paul Sarbanes' bills.
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/532756-1.htm...
"During deliberations, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Alabama) dismissed the alternative submitted by ranking member Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)."
And as 4THCHANCE's youtube clip shows, when the Democrats did assume power in 2007 (after 12 years of Republican control of Congress), the Democrats were able to pass regulatory legislation within 2 months. The problem was that by 2007, the legislation passed by the Democrats was too late to stop the momentum of Freddie Mac's collapse.
I think it would be a mistake to claim that Democrats did nothing. The Democrats tried once in 2005 while Republicans controlled Congress to pass regulatory legislation under Paul Sarbanes and it was killed in committee. After winning a slim Congressional majority in the 2006 elections, the Democrats tried again in 2007 and successfully passed regulatory legislation, but it was simply too late.
-
-
100%
mesodude12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What I find comical is that, until this crisis, Rush and FOX never mentioned Chris Dodd's name and they'd only spoonfed cons that old right wing folk tale that Barney Frank is that gay dude who once ran a prostitution ring from his basement (false) and who received a standing ovation from Congress afterwards (nope...that never happened either, cons but I think we all remember a seven-felony convict from Alaska who did recently get a standing ovation from Congress--and, surprise FOX and the wingnuts are DEAD silent about that). How is that cons suddenly know so much about Barney Frank and Chris Dodd? And how is it that cons can believe that two people could be so powerful when, prior to '06, Republicans had been in control of Congress for the previous decade?This totally amazes me. ;-(
Reply
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned3 Replies
-
-
-
93%
Eagle_Eye12 months ago
-
96%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
EAGLE EYE:
Reply
"Very interesting.......I heard it was all the Dems fault and now I see the Newt had his icky fingers in it."
That's precisely why I posted this story -- to debunk some of the misconceptions and talking points floating around the news, radio, and web.
In fairness, some Republicans were actually trying to pass regulatory legislation. Those Republicans included Chuck Hagel and John Sununu. But they were outnumbered and outgunned by those Republicans being lobbied by Freddie Mac via the DCI Lobbying Group. -
91%
Eagle_Eye12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"According to confidential company documents obtained by The Associated Press, Reps. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, and Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., spent the evening in hard-to-obtain seats near the Nationals dugout with Freddie Mac executive Hollis McLoughlin and four of Freddie Mac's in-house lobbyists."
Reply
Why is this stuff just now coming out? I think we are going to get some real "Nightmare" stories of how seriously corrupt and evil the last 10+ years have been.
I use 10+ years because this all started before Clinton was president and the GOP so seriously tied him up with the sex thing that I do now believe, IMHO, they were using it as a smoke screen to continue screwing the people. By keeping the nation preoccupied with Clintons sex life they were able to take focus off of their deregulation, lobbyists, etc.
I think we are in really serious trouble, it is going to get really bad and worse before it gets better. IMHO-
100%
JohnGault12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This isn't some conspiracy by the dems or rep. to go out and get us. Its our government that fails to have a longterm planning. It is about getting elected now and showing short term results, both on the Federal and State levels. In the periods of economic expansion Govt. needs to control its spending so when there is an economic downturn it can fill the void until the economy picks up. However the States did not do this, and now their obligations, do not meet their shrinking tax revenues.... so guess who is going in the bail out line next.
Reply
So whom do we blame..... Us
Ask yourself " How do we measure government?"
How do they measure themselves.
Until we can measure Government we cannot manage them. Until they give us the transparency they always talk about. We will not be able to hold accountable those responsible.-
100%
Lurch12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> Until we can measure Government we cannot manage them.
Reply
Not perfect, but an improvement over the past no transparency and no accountability:
http://obama.senate.gov/issues/good_government_res... -
100%
DarkWizard12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
JohnGault,
Reply
I agree with your assessment all the way up to the point where you say, "So whom do we blame...Us."
When the politicians have decided to feed us a two-party system, with only the appearance of alternative choices, and the two remaining choices are bad cop or worse cop, the only thing we are really voting for is "marketing and advertisement" unless a true candidate for change emerges.
With the population the size it has become there is almost no chance for a majority consensus, or agreement upon a course, to constitutionally abolish or hold accountable those who've succumbed to the machine. The system was set up with checks and balances for this very reason. The Forefathers new there may come a time when the government would overwhelm the average American's ability to do more than protest.
-
-
88%
Progressive12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As an Independent, albeit liberal, I have to concede that Kanjorski, who was just re-elected, is utterly corrupt. However, his Republican opponent promised nothing more than a lateral pass.
Reply
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't it take McCain over a year to sign on to Hagel's legislation? This story leads me to suspect that McCain waited until he knew the lobbyists building his last run for the presidency had his colleagues safely in the tank.
-
-
88%
Lurch12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think it no coincidence that Newt "I cheated on my cancer wife while smearing Clinton" Gingrich is making a comeback in Republican circles of late.
Reply
Anybody who can sell out his country that badly for pure profit and political gain is a ringer for Republican Party Leadership. Newt, you got what it takes! -
-
-
91%
CHAM12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ybdog. Good Post. But a few omissions, probably accidental, but let me elaborate. That DCI Lobbying Firm that was paid $2 Million to stop the regulation is owned by Doug Goodyear.
Reply
Recognize the name? Read any of my past posts about McCain and Freddie and Fannie? If you have you might recall that I was carrying on that Doug Goodyear was McCain's selection to manage the Republican Convention. Think about that. And I believe that McCain's Campaign manager ( Rick Davis ) also received $2 Million to help. I kept crying about this guy being in McCain's inner circle. Not just "guilt by association".
Anyone besides me think it odd that McCain was one of the four sponsoring the regulatory limits while at the same time a couple of his inner circle was being paid big bucks to stop it?
I voted against McCain and his Twit.-
90%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CHAM:
Reply
"Good Post. But a few omissions, probably accidental, but let me elaborate. That DCI Lobbying Firm that was paid $2 Million to stop the regulation is owned by Doug Goodyear."
Oh, don't worry. I've posted articles about Doug Goodyear before too. In fact, here are a few gems I posted several months ago as a reminder:
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/05/30/obama-ta...
http://www.newsweek.com/id/136321
"Doug Goodyear, McCain's selection for GOP Convention Chair, is CEO of DCI Group, which earned $3 million lobbying for ExxonMobil and GM.
DCI was paid $348,000 to represent Burma's military junta, which was condemned by the State Dept. for its human-rights record and remains in power today. His firm created a PR campaign to burnish the junta's image, denouncing 'falsehoods' by the Bush administration that the regime engaged in rape and other abuses.
Goodyear's firm also pioneered 527 groups, precisely the kind of operations that McCain, in his battle for campaign-finance reform, has denounced.
Ironically, Goodyear was chosen for the post after the McCain campaign nixed another candidate, Paul Manafort, who runs a lobbying firm with McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis."
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/07/03/carl-lin...
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB217/indi...
http://www.thelangreport.com/featured/carl-linder-...
"Carl Lindner co-hosted a $25,000-per-person fundraiser for McCain. The event raised about $2 million; Lindner also serves on McCain's Ohio Victory Team.
A report by the Organization of American States states that Lindner's firm also engaged in arms trafficking, helping to deliver 3,000 Nicaraguan AK-47 rifles and millions of rounds of ammunition to the AUC in 2001. According to federal prosecutors, when company officials realized the arrangement was illegal, they switched to making the payments in cash.
McCain has described FARC as 'one of the worst' terrorist groups."
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/07/03/carl-lin...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...
"Longtime uber-lobbyist Charles R. Black Jr. is John McCain's man in Washington. Black was Jonas Savimbi's man in the capital city. His lobbying firm received millions from the brutal Angolan guerrilla leader and took advantage of Black's contacts in Congress and the White House. Black and his partners were at times registered foreign agents for a remarkable collection of U.S.-backed foreign leaders whose human rights records were sometimes harshly criticized.
What the firm achieved was quickly dubbed 'Savimbi chic.' Foreign-agent records document hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on behalf of UNITA, including $76,491 for limousines, $13,675 for photography and $216,186 for lodging at the Grand Hotel and the Waldorf-Astoria.
McCain 'portrays himself as Mr. Clean, and then he has all these lobbyists around him who are connected to a lot of not-so-clean people.'"
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/05/30/obama-ta...
"McCain's help for Keating came after Keating had donated $112,000 to McCain from 1982 to 1987, had taken McCain and his family on nine trips, including three to the Bahamas, and had gone in on a business deal with McCain's wife and father-in-law.
In 1982, Keating held a fund-raiser for him, collecting more than $11,000 from 40 employees of American Continental Corp. In 1983, as McCain contemplated his House re-election, Keating hosted a $1,000-a-plate dinner for him, even though McCain had no serious competition. When McCain pushed for the Senate in 1986, Keating was there with more than $50,000. By 1987, McCain had received about $112,000 from Keating and his associates.
The Arizona Republic revealed that McCain's wife and her father had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center."
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/07/03/carl-lin...
http://citizensforethics.org/node/29942
"The FEC has fined a 527 group that aired ads during Barack Obama's 2004 Senate campaign. The Empower Illinois Media Fund violated campaign rules by raising money to defeat Obama without registering with the FEC as a political committee or complying with federal contribution limits and reporting requirements. The group agreed to shut down and pay the fine."-
85%
CHAM12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ybdog. I think you and I are on the same page. I don't know how many times I ranted about McCain being put forward as Mister Clean when he was as dirty as a pig in his sty.
Reply
I read that $359,100 investment returned $15 million when Cindy sold it.
And speaking of Cindy - real class if the definition is drug abuser, etc. , etc.
When the Conservatives were complaining about the "Liberal Media" I pointed that the Liberal Media had failed the Liberals, because they wouldn't print any of what you just put in ink.
America dodged a bullet when McCain and his Moose hunter went back home. -
71%
CRYMTYPHON12 months ago
-
-
-
-
80%
CRYMTYPHON12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is called HTML tags; you type them at the beginning and end of what you want to change.
Reply
To do bold, type < B> at the start, and < /B> at the end.
Like: < b> this is bold < b>.
You can also do italics < i>
and underline < u>.
These examples all have a space between the < and the letter; don't put a space there. (If I had not put a space you would not see the tags ).
It gets old, and eventualy you tune it out; content still rules.
-
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned7 Replies
-
-
-
-
-
42%
Painesright12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Um, they didn't need to lobby the Democrats because they were already OPPOSED to regulating Fannie/Freddie.
Reply
To argue that this is a problem caused only by Republican is beyond denial... it's downright delusional!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs=related-
94%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, they didn't lobby the Democrats because between 2003-2005, Democrats did not control the committees in the Senate and the House whose responsibility it was to provide oversight for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
Reply
Make no mistake about it: REPUBLICANS controlled the committee. REPUBLICANS could have brought forth the desired legislation with or without the Democrats. But it was the REPUBLICANS who killed Hagel's bill in committee because they were being lobbied by DCI.
Republicans could have passed the bill even if Democrats voted along party lines to reject it. The Democrats simply lacked the votes to do anything so your "argument" is tantamount to revision by obfuscation.
This is odd coming from the alleged "party of personal responsibility," don't you think?
LOL.-
40%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Make no mistake about it: REPUBLICANS controlled the committee"
Reply
And every Democrat on the committee opposed Fannie and Freddie regulation
Why is that important - that pesky Senate rule requiring 60 votes to get a vote on legislation
When you have 100% of the minority on a committee lined up against a bill, it is clear that the other Democrats in the Senate will fall into lock step and prevent a vote on the legislation
You do understand how the Senate works, don't you?-
86%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NOSTALGIA:
Reply
"And every Democrat on the committee opposed Fannie and Freddie regulation
Why is that important - that pesky Senate rule requiring 60 votes to get a vote on legislation"
Actually, you do NOT need 60 votes to "get a vote on legislation," as you crudely put it. The Senate Majority Leader (Bill Frist) simply needed to schedule the bill into the Senate's agenda for the bill to be considered. Now, if the bill encountered a filibuster, then yes it would take 60 votes to invoke cloture and end the filibuster.
However, the progress of the bill HAD NOT GOTTEN EVEN THAT FAR YET and Hagels' bill was NOT killed by a Democratic filibuster. Hagel's bill was killed by Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who refused to even consider the legislation by adding it to the Senate's agenda.
There was no vote on Hagel's bill. There was no filibuster on Hagel's bill. There was no movement for cloture on Hagel's bill. There was simply Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, refusing to allow discussion of Hagel's bill.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27266607/
"In the cross hairs of the campaign carried out by DCI of Washington were Republican senators and a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. DCI's chief executive is Doug Goodyear, whom John McCain's campaign later hired to manage the GOP convention in September. In the midst of DCI's yearlong effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.
Unknown to the senators, DCI was undermining support for the bill in a campaign targeting 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. The states and the senators targeted changed over time, but always stayed on the Republican side.
McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, or his lobbying firm has taken more than $2 million from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac dating to 2000. In December, Freddie Mac contributed $250,000 to last month’s GOP convention.
Before 2004, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Democratic strongholds. After 2004, Republicans ran their political operations. McLoughlin, who joined Freddie Mac in 2004 as chief of staff, has given $32,250 to Republican candidates over the years, including $2,800 to McCain, and has given none to Democrats."
You do know how the Senate works, don't you? Here, read. Who knows? You might actually learn something.
http://rules.senate.gov/public/
LOL.
Keep spinning.-
33%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why don't you find a single bill in the Senate where EVERY member of the minority on a committee votes against a bill and it makes it to the floor to even get a cloture vote (when the majority party does not have 60 votes to invoke cloture)
Reply
Let me know when you have a link to the bill and I'll take a look-
86%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why do I have to do your homework for you?
Reply
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...
"With prodding from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 10 to 8 along party lines to approve a bill negotiated with the White House to allow -- but not require -- Bush to submit the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program to a secret court for constitutional review."
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jan/25/nation/na-...
"Senate Panel Backs the Nomination of Samuel Alito on Strict Party-Line Vote: All of the Judiciary Committee’s 10 Republicans supported Alito. All the committee’s eight Democrats voted against Alito. But Democrats stopped short of calling for a filibuster – the only apparent way the minority party could derail Alito’s nomination in the GOP-controlled Senate."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940...
"In Party-Line Vote, House Panel Approves Security Dept.: Only the Republicans on a special House committee voted to create a new Department of Homeland Security tonight, after the panel's Democrats failed to get their way on a variety of issues, including protections for the department's workers. The party-line vote presages a similar struggle in the full House next week on an anti-terrorism agency once seen as nonpartisan."
-
-
-
-
-
-
29%
Painesright12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry, that was a faulty link. This one should work:
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs -
40%
Painesright12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's another good one, just to keep things fair and balanced...
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0=related -
92%
CHAM12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Painesright. Ybdog again forgot to mention that the deregulation plan and bill was developed and delivered by McCains Senior Advisor, one Phil Gramm. Another in McCain's inner circle.
Reply
But you see Paines, Ybdog had so much to report that its easy to overlook many things - say like the Air Force Tanker deal, you know the $40 Billion Contract for the Air Force tanker, that McCain got the specs changed so that the American Company couldn't win over the European Company. Would have been a loss of about 30,000 American jobs if Boeing hadn't been able to overturn the decision and get it re-evaluated.
Yes McCain was so dirty that I'll bet George didn't vote for him. Now that would be the pot calling the kettle black.-
-
83%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/economy...
Reply
“'Some people look at subprime lending and see evil. I look at subprime lending and I see the American dream in action,' Phil Gramm (R-Texas) said.
On Capitol Hill, Mr. Gramm became the most effective proponent of deregulation in a generation. And in one remarkable stretch from 1999 to 2001, he pushed laws and promoted policies that he says unshackled businesses from needless restraints but his critics charge significantly contributed to the financial crisis that has rattled the nation.
He led the effort to block measures curtailing deceptive or predatory lending, which was just beginning to result in a jump in home foreclosures that would undermine the financial markets. He advanced legislation that fractured oversight of Wall Street while knocking down Depression-era barriers that restricted the rise and reach of financial conglomerates. And he pushed through a provision that ensured virtually no regulation of the complex financial instruments known as derivatives, including credit swaps, contracts that would encourage risky investment practices at Wall Street’s most venerable institutions and spread the risks, like a virus, around the world.
From 1989 to 2002, federal records show, Phil Gramm was the top recipient of campaign contributions from commercial banks and in the top five for donations from Wall Street. He and his staff often appeared at industry-sponsored speaking events around the country.
From 1999 to 2001, Congress first considered steps to curb predatory loans — those that typically had high fees, significant prepayment penalties and ballooning monthly payments and were often issued to low-income borrowers. Foreclosures on such loans were on the rise, setting off a wave of personal bankruptcies. But Mr. Gramm did everything he could to block the measures. In 2000, he refused to have his banking committee consider the proposals, an intervention hailed by the National Association of Mortgage Brokers as a 'huge, huge step for us.' A year later, he objected again when Democrats tried to stop lenders from being able to pursue claims in bankruptcy court against borrowers who had defaulted on predatory loans.
In late 1999, Mr. Gramm played a central role in what would be the most significant financial services legislation since the Depression. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as the measure was called, removed barriers between commercial and investment banks that had been instituted to reduce the risk of economic catastrophes. Long sought by the industry, the law would let commercial banks, securities firms and insurers become financial supermarkets offering an array of services.
The measure, which Mr. Gramm helped write and move through the Senate, also split up oversight of conglomerates among government agencies. But some critics worried that the lack of oversight would allow abuses that could threaten the economy.
Michael D. Donovan, a former S.E.C. lawyer, faulted Mr. Gramm for his insistence on deregulating the derivatives market. 'He was the architect, advocate and the most knowledgeable person in Congress on these topics. To me, Phil Gramm is the single most important reason for the current financial crisis.' Many experts, including some of Mr. Gramm’s former allies in Congress say the lack of oversight left the system vulnerable.
'The virtually unregulated over-the-counter market in credit-default swaps has played a significant role in the credit crisis, including the now $167 billion taxpayer rescue of A.I.G.,' Christopher Cox, the chairman of the S.E.C."
-
-
88%
Radiofreeeuropa12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Overall deregulation has been a republican mantra ever since Reagan. The Democrats seemed to have been brought on board coming from an angle that it would "help the poor". This has played out the way republicans will eventually be for allowing gay marriage, (not for the same reasons democrats do) but because it's profitable.
Reply
We must face the truth, that industry lobbyists convinced all those who supported this awful policy change, sold it to their respective suckers with whatever reasoning and promises it took to get them on board. The industry itself is primarily to blame for seeking to change sound economic principles to flimsy ones.
Government aided and abetted. Both parties for different reasons. They all failed to provide sensible oversight. There are no real good guys in this story.
To conclude and condense, the financial and mortgage industries should have known this was unsound to begin with. Government failed to provide prudent regulation. It .
happened because of corruption between lobbyists and government officials. And as pointed out by Cham and ybdogsct; McCain and his campaign were very dirty in this affair.
Don't expect people who oppose government to run it well.
Republicans think Government is the source of all problems, they subvert and sabotage at every opportunity. This is not a criticism, it serves the idealogy well. But voters need to consider how wise it is to appoint a racist to a committee that seeks to bolster good relations between races, to elect someone who hates animals to oversee the SPCA, or someone who hates government to government office. (Unless of course the goal is in fact sabotage.)-
60%
jimdoze12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Free(er) Markets have been the mantra since the days of Reagan, RFE. Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac were anathema to free markets... and because they were and because of their size, they were and are at the root of the current financial train wreck. Those are simple facts that even you cannot nitpick.
Reply
BTW, to watch Chris Dodd call for the heads of GM and Chrysler this weekend was a spectacle to behold. I, for one, think that as a matter of political expediency that some GM and Chrysler execs need to be made sacrificial lambs. But, to watch Countrywide Chris call for that showed the brassiest pair in a long time. -
-
-
-
91%
jovial12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Great post, ybdog! They even had me believing it for a while there. One thing I have to give the conservatives, they sure know how to twist a story around. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I bookmarked this story. You provided the fodder I needed against the conservatives I know that have been repetitively blaming Democrats for this mess.
Reply-
80%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no twisting - it is simply another bipartisan failure with both sides lining up to blame the other side in hopes of diverting attention away from the wrong doing of "their party"
Reply
Wake up and look at how your own House member and Senators voted and who they took money from
Unless you are willing to do that, nothing in DC will ever change
If you believe Dodd and Frank are not part of the problem, you have been duped again-
83%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NOSTALGIA:
Reply
"Wake up and look at how your own House member and Senators voted and who they took money from"
1) There was NO VOTE, there was NO DEBATE, there was NO FILIBUSTER, and there was NO CLOTURE. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist wouldn't even allow the bill to reach the floor of the Senate, which preemptively killed Hagel's bill in committee.
2) Yes, let's examine to whom Freddie Mac DCI was contributing money.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27266607/
"Unknown to the senators, DCI was undermining support for the bill in a campaign targeting 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. The states and the senators targeted changed over time, but always stayed on the Republican side.
McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, or his lobbying firm has taken more than $2 million from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac dating to 2000. In December, Freddie Mac contributed $250,000 to last month’s GOP convention.
Before 2004, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Democratic strongholds. After 2004, Republicans ran their political operations. McLoughlin, who joined Freddie Mac in 2004 as chief of staff, has given $32,250 to Republican candidates over the years, including $2,800 to McCain, and has given none to Democrats."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161218
"A Freddie Mac Money Trail Catches Up With McCain: Last week, though, McCain's trust in his campaign manager Rick Davis was tested again amid disclosures that Freddie Mac, the troubled mortgage giant that was recently placed under federal conservatorship, paid his campaign manager's firm $15,000 a month between 2006 and August 2008."-
0%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Wake up and look at how your own House member and Senators voted and who they took money from"
Reply
Well I don't vote for either of the Senators from my state
I did vote for my House member because he voted against the bailout bill and he has taken no money from wither Fannie or Freddie
Can you say the same or do you only like to pretend the Democrats you vote for are blameless?
How about what went on in 2008 - it's that more relevant to the situation right now?
Both companies have poured money into lobbying and campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties and committees as a general tactic, but they've also directed those contributions strategically. In the 2006 election cycle, Fannie Mae was giving 53 percent of its total $1.3 million in contributions to Republicans, who controlled Congress at that time.
This cycle, with Democrats in control, they've reversed course, giving the party 56 percent of their total $1.1 million in contributions. Similarly, Freddie Mac has given 53 percent of its $555,700 in contributions to Democrats this cycle, compared to the 44 percent it gave during 2006.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also strategically given more contributions to lawmakers currently sitting on committees that primarily regulate their industry. Fifteen of the 25 lawmakers who have received the most from the two companies combined since the 1990 election sit on either the House Financial Services Committee; the Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee; or the Senate Finance Committee.
The others have seats on the powerful Appropriations or Ways & Means committees, are members of the congressional leadership or have run for president. Sen.Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) chairman of the Senate banking committee, has received the most from Fannie and Freddie's PACs and employees ($133,900 since 1989). Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) has received $65,500. Kanjorski chairs the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises, and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs.
http://www.rightsidenews.com/200809272064/culture-...-
67%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How about looking at all of the contributions made by Fannie and Freddie?
Reply
Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
1. Dodd, Christopher J S D-CT $133,900
2. Kerry, John S D-MA $111,000
3. Obama, Barack S D-IL $105,849
4. Clinton, Hillary S D-NY $75,550
5. Kanjorski, Paul E H D-PA $65,500
6. Bennett, Robert F S R-UT $61,499
7. Johnson, Tim S D-SD $61,000
8. Conrad, Kent S D-ND $58,991
9. Davis, Tom H R-VA $55,499
10. Bond, Christopher S 'Kit' S R-MO $55,400
11. Bachus, Spencer H R-AL $55,300
12. Shelby, Richard C S R-AL $55,000
13. Emanuel, Rahm H D-IL $51,750
14. Reed, Jack S D-RI $50,750
15. Carper, Tom S D-DE $44,389
16. Frank, Barney H D-MA $40,100
17. Maloney, Carolyn B H D-NY $38,750
18. Bean, Melissa H D-IL $37,249
19. Blunt, Roy H R-MO $36,500
20. Pryce, Deborah H R-OH $34,750
21. Miller, Gary H R-CA $33,000
22. Pelosi, Nancy H D-CA $32,750
23. Reynolds, Tom H R-NY $32,700
24. Hoyer, Steny H H D-MD $30,500
25. Hooley, Darlene H D-OR $28,750
http://pfds.opensecrets.org/092408.html
Are you getting the picture yet?? Corruption is corruption regardless of party affliation-
100%
HannibalBarca12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is not really corruption, just how free market works; gotta make a buck, any way you can.
Reply
This is not as common in small business as it is in corporations, just look at Lehman's, goes belly up while the CEO made $300-$500 mill in bonuses over 5 years, depending on whose figures you use.
And this is not an isolated case, Exxon, GM, Ford, mining, oil contractors, shipping magnets,,,,most are so overpaid that calling the system "Free Market" is like calling Stalin a humanitarian. -
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NOSTALGIA:
Reply
"Fifteen of the 25 lawmakers who have received the most from the two companies combined since the 1990 election sit on either the House Financial Services Committee. Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008."
Are you blind or just illiterate? The feature article states that DCI lobbied Congressmen on Freddie Mac's behalf in 2005 and that most of these Congressmen were Republicans. The article I cited above states that since 2004, Freddie Mac has lobbied Republicans almost exclusively. Here it is again:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27266607/
"Before 2004, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Democratic strongholds. After 2004, Republicans ran their political operations. McLoughlin, who joined Freddie Mac in 2004 as chief of staff, has given $32,250 to Republican candidates over the years, including $2,800 to McCain, and has given none to Democrats."
And in rebuttal, all of your data extend back from 1989? LOL. Way to skew the data.
Well guess what, the Democrats who controlled the Banking Committees in 1989 did NOT control them in 2005 when Hagel's and Sarbanes' regulatory bills were squashed in committee.
So show me the data since 2004.
Go ahead.
I'll wait.-
50%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ybdogsct
Reply
Are you really that blind or just so partisan you won't see what is in front of your own eyes
Both parties are complicit in this fiasco
You trying to place the blame on only one party is pathetic
Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004 and he managed to collect the 3rd highest amount in that short time
They are all bought and paid for!
Lobbyists are an equal opportunity group - they buy politicians from both parties - WAKE UP-
ybdogsctComment removed: Spam
-
ybdogsctComment removed: Spam
-
ybdogsctComment removed: Spam
-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's a simple request, NOSTALGIA, unless of course you can't do it or are afraid of what you'll find. Stop avoiding the question. I'll repeat once more:
Reply
Show me the data since 2004. Please include a direct link.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27266607/
"Before 2004, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Democratic strongholds. After 2004, Republicans ran their political operations. McLoughlin, who joined Freddie Mac in 2004 as chief of staff, has given $32,250 to Republican candidates over the years, including $2,800 to McCain, and has given none to Democrats." -
Neutral
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let's start here:
Reply
Freddie, Fannie, Merrill, et al stopped their political donations last month
Once huge campaign donors, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers and AIG all but ended their generosity in August as they teetered on the brink of insolvency.
Since the start of 2007, Freddie and Fannie had given a combined $829,000 to federal candidates and campaign accounts. Merrill had given $2.1 million, Lehman $1.9 million, and AIG had handed out $664,000. Here is one previous post on the contributions.
But suddenly, the spigot shut off, as often happens during insolvency. Perhaps they saw troubled times coming, because for the most part, they stopped giving campaign donations in August.
AIG is one exception. It contributed $2,500 on Aug. 27 to a political action committee controlled by former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, and another $1,000 to Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.) on Aug. 8, newly filed campaign finance reports showed today.
Fannie, Freddie, Merrill and Lehman gave no donations, their filings with the Federal Election Commission reveal. Rep Steve Kagen (D-Wisc.) did receive $1,000 from Fannie Mae's political action committee in July. Apparently, he saw the debacle coming.
Fannie lists the check as being returned on Aug. 29.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09...-
Neutral
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
since 2005
Reply
The federal takeover of mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae may stabilize the economy and help the housing industry.
But some politicians could take a hit too, most particularly Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
The money has gone to both Republicans and Democrats.
But Obama is the recipient of the largest individual money, at $111,849, according to federal campaign finance reports compiled by Times researcher Maloy Moore.
Republican nominee John McCain has taken $16,400 from Freddie and Fannie employees since 2005
Democratic and Republican committees set up to fund congressional and Senate races are the biggest recipients. Freddie PAC, Fannie PAC and their employees have given $171,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and $123,000 to the Republican Senate committee since 2005.
Other major individual recipients include House Republican Leader John Boehner and his political action committee, $71,750; Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell and his PAC, $62,500; and Senate leader Harry Reid and his PAC, $61,000.
Hillary Rodham Clinton took $56,100 and Christopher Dodd took $53,450.
Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, brought up the rear during the period reviewed, receiving just one donation from one Freddie employee of $500. McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is Freddie- and Fannie-free, having never run for federal office.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09...-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FROM YOUR OWN ARTICLE:
Reply
"Individuals who list their employers as one of the two entities"
Accepting money from individuals who happen to work for Freddie Mac is NOT equivalant to accepting special interest from a Freddie Mac PAC. These donors were acting as individuals, NOT as Freddie Mac lobbyists attempting to influence legislation in the same way that the DCI lobbyist group influenced and bought Republican support to kill Hagel's bill in committee.
LOL.
Show me how much Obama accepted not from individual employees acting as individual concerned citizens, but from a Freddie Mac or DCI PAC acting as a special interest.
It's a little distressing, although not entirely surprising, that you have failed to distinguish between the two.
FAIL: Try again.-
Neutral
amazed12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
((Accepting money from individuals who happen to work for Freddie Mac is NOT equivalant to accepting special interest from a Freddie Mac PAC. These donors were acting as individuals, NOT as Freddie Mac lobbyists attempting to influence legislation in the same way that the DCI lobbyist group influenced and bought Republican support to kill Hagel's bill in committee))
Reply
Are you REALLY that naive???
Funneling contributions through your friends and employees is one of the oldest campaign contribution tricks.-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
AMAZED:
Reply
"Funneling contributions through your friends and employees is one of the oldest campaign contribution tricks."
Hmmm... Election fraud -- that's quite an accusation, AMAZED.
If that's what you think is really going on here, then I suggest you
PROVE IT .
Prove that these individuals were acting out of DCI and Freddie Mac's corporate interests to influence the legislation of the banking committee of which Obama is not even a member. Prove that these individuals were not donating as individual citizens who feel concerned over the direction this country has taken over the past 8 years. Prove that these individuals were not donating as individuals who wanted to participate in this historic election.
That's right. It's time for you to PUT UP OR SHUT UP !
Without any proof, you've contributed NOTHING but speculation and innuendo.
Don't forget to include direct links to the nonpartisan documentation you cite as "proof."
And to answer your question, no, I'm not "that naive." That's why I'm going to require PROOF before I can believe any of the unsubstantiated bloviating you've just posted.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
90%
DarkWizard12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ybdogsct,
Reply
Thank you for the invite and great story. I think we will see a wave of prosecutions coming down the pike once the transitional period is over. I've read that as many as 400 people are on the FBI's radar for investigation into illegal activities related to this economic crisis. I'm sure some of those will be government officials and politicians too. I'm sure the number of people being investigated will probably go up as more data is uncovered in to these dirty practices.
Be sure of one thing. No matter how many Republicans are directly involved or found guilty, the right-wing faithful will have a spin showing that somehow it's still really the Democrats' fault. -
91%
gamahuche12 months ago
-
50%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"How about an agreement to eliminate the euphemism "lobbying" from the American language and replace it with the honest English "bribery"
Reply
Really??
How about banning ALL members of government from ever becoming lobbyists - especially elected officials??
Can you explain to me why this pattern of employment is even allowed??
Tom Daschle:
Elected to the House of Representatives in 1978
Went on to serve in the Senate until he lost his re-election bid in 2004
Post-senate career - Senior Policy Advisor with the K Street law firm Alston & Bird, Health care interests, including CVS Caremark, the National Association for Home Care and Hospice, Abbott Laboratories and HealthSouth, are among the firm's lobbying clients
Daschle will be Obama's Health and Human Services secretary - he'll deal with healthcare when he was a lobbyist for the healthcare industry
Daschle was recruited to join the K Street law firm Alston & Birdby the former Republican Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole. Daschle has refused to discuss his salary, but Dole, performing a similar role at the firm, has said he makes in the region of $800,000 to $1 million per year
Why was Dole allowed to take this position when his wife was in the Senate?
All smells to high heaven doesn't it?-
83%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You bring up K-Street, but neglect to mention that almost all of their new hires are REPUBLICAN. LOL. Talk about cherrypicking.
Reply
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0829/p01s01-uspo.htm...
"It's a sign that the ties between the GOP-controlled Congress and the lobby shops on K Street are getting tighter - with significant consequences for issues ranging from tax policy to healthcare. Some who have led the GOP push for K Street power even talk openly of a career path for young recruits to ponder: Serve in Congress, then "retire" to a pot of gold to follow in a job representing business interests on Capitol Hill.
'The Republicans are putting the Democrats to shame' in forging K Street ties, says Frank Clemente, director of Public Citizen's Congress Project. 'The revolving door is becoming more comfortably established and institutionalized.'
'90% of the new top hires on K-Street are going to Republicans; it should be 100 percent,' says Grover Norquist. Most of the recent new hires in the lobby shops along the K Street corridor, and especially the top ones, have been Republicans, many from the Bush administration and Capitol Hill. Since 2000, only two Democratic members of Congress have jumped to K Street lobby shops, compared with 15 Republican members."-
-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NOSTALGIA:
Reply
"Are you trying to justify what Daschle and Dole did?"
No, I'm trying to provide a little perspective on the data you present. Your inclusion of one example of a Democrat and one of a Republican implies that K-Street is split 50:50 between Democrats and Republicans. But that couldn't be further from the truth.
The TRUTH is that Republicans have controlled K-Street for quite some time now. So while you rail against K-Street, I find it laughable that your example of K-Street corruption is Democrat Tom Daschle, when new Republicans outnumber new Democrats on K-Street by 15:2.
Are you trying to deny that the majority of K-Street's new hires and lobbying have targeted Republicans?
This is just another example of you trying to skew the data. Well, it's not going to work.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0829/p01s01-uspo.htm...
'90% of the new top hires on K-Street are going to Republicans; it should be 100 percent,' says Grover Norquist. Most of the recent new hires in the lobby shops along the K Street corridor, and especially the top ones, have been Republicans, many from the Bush administration and Capitol Hill. Since 2000, only two Democratic members of Congress have jumped to K Street lobby shops, compared with 15 Republican members."
LOL.-
-
100%
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And in a business (K-Street) currently dominated by Republicans (by a 15:2 ratio), your paradigm of "government officials becoming lobbyists" is........Democrat Tom Daschle?
Reply
Are you serious?
Nice representative example there....Way to draw a sample from the statistical median....-
-
Neutral
ybdogsct12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NOSTALGIA:
Reply
"You want to point fingers at one party and exempt the other"
WRONG.
In fact, I've already stated previously that:
YBDOGSCT:
"In fairness, some Republicans were actually trying to pass regulatory legislation. Those Republicans included Chuck Hagel and John Sununu."
However, I'm not foolish enough to think that just because BOTH parties are somewhat responsible, that blame should be doled out equally -- particularly when:
1) Republicans who have controlled Congress for the past 12 years failed to pass regulatory legislation even after controlling all 3 branches of the federal government from 2001-2006.
2) Democrats, like Paul Sarbanes, were trying to get regulatory legislation passed during the 109th Republican-controlled Congress to avert a Freddie Mac collapse but their bills were killed in committee, like Chuck Hagel's bill, by Republicans
3) Not more than 2 months after Democrats assumed a Congressional majority in 2007, Democrats successfully passed regulatory legislation that Republicans failed to pass, although by then it was simply too late to stop the momentum of Freddie mac's collapse.
As CRYMTYPHON said below:
CRYMTYPHON:
"If both parties have some blame, the portions are very unequal."
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
83%
Lurch12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How do you think Cheney got so filthy rich, emphasis on filthy? All nine figures of his income/assets came from govt contracts. Gee, wonder why he likes those secret meetings and `privatized` govt contracts so much - one million for the troops, one million for me...
Reply
George was for taxes before he was against them. George was for stealing private property before he was ... even more for it.
As part of Ranger Gate, George was part of the investment group that created a pseudo-govt study group that eventually used eminent domain to steal private property and give it to themselves so they could make even more money from the new Ranger stadium. To pay for the stadium, they hired a law firm to lie to the citizens and raise their taxes, which went to, you guessed it. George and his cronies. George turned a $600K loan into a $14M windfall in a matter of a couple of years. The Clintons and their Whitewater was Girl Scouts compared to what the Bush`s did to get rich.
Lobbying? How about we just prosecute people who break the intent of the law and not just the letter? Oh, and give their money and assets to crime victims.
-
-
86%
Spadecaller12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here Here! G.
Reply
For years I have been sick of the fact lobbying is considered a "reputable practice". It's freaking bribery. It always was and it always will be. Bribery is illegal but if you change its description to "lobbying" it's supposed to make it respectable. Horse Sh!T. -
SwampFox-82ndComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
92%
cowboygrandpa12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
All you have to do is mention Gingrich and my dander gets up !!!!!
Reply
Slime ball SOB who directed attention of Clinton while cheating on his sick wife !!!!
That ass hole is going to enjoy a very hot place in eternity one he earned all by himself !!!
Of course the Republicans are for big business, it is the only way to steal millions of dollars in bribes yearly.
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were the Republican poster children for out of control greed, yet the Reublicans pushed for them to remain mostly unregulated. Then tried to blame the Democrats.
Wow !!!! Thank God the slimeballs are out of power !!!! Now lets get busy and reform the laws they destroyed with their greedy ways !!!!
Oh yeah, if you see Newt Gringrich coming your way just say Satan, get thee behind me !!!!-
SwampFox-82ndComment removed: Retracted by user
-
90%
cowboygrandpa12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
SwampFox-82nd:
Reply
Amen brother !!!!
A lot of good men died in a lot of foreign lands as well as in this land for our freedoms !!!!
I'll be damned if I roll over for either party !!!!
It is just that I see so many lying chickensh*t Republican politicians that I want to stick their nose in the sh*t they don't seem to mind putting others in !!!!
It is all a big SNAFU when they get involved.
Love to go fishing, getting ready to take my grandson to do some stream fishing in about a month. I know a little place where I can always find trout !!! LOL
Mmmmmmmmmmm sure is good cooked in a lemon butter served on a bed of rice pilaf !!!!!!
This time of year the rabbit is good as well. Rabbit stew !!!!! Mmmmmmmmmmmm !!!!!!
Peace my brother !!!!! -
hefaa1Comment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
SwampFox-82ndComment removed: Retracted by user
-
67%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What happened when there was an attempt by Sen. DeMint to add an amendment to the housing bailout bill this summer that would ban GSEs from hiring lobbyists???
Reply
Anyone know??
Senate Republicans Push Ban on GSE Lobbying
Seven Republican senators sent Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) a letter on Wednesday urging the Majority Leader to include a ban on lobbying and political activity by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in legislation aimed at bolstering the two mortgage giants.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has threatened to hold up the housing legislation unless it is amended to include a provision prohibiting the two companies from lobbying Congress.
Sen. Reid responded in by sending an e-mail to business lobbyists, asking K Street for some help.
"We are informed that Sen. DeMint would like to seek an amendment to the House amendment," wrote a Reid staffer. "While we have not seen Sen. DeMint's amendment, it's fair to say that such an amendment could complicate debate and delay passage of the housing bill."
“If American taxpayers are forced to buyout Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, their lobbying and political activities should stop,” explained DeMint, who introduced the idea of a ban last week. “If we plan to use taxpayer dollars to buy shares of these troubled companies, they should be treated like other federal entities.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0708/Senate...
This isn't a problem with one party or the other
This is a case of politicians from both parties showing their greed
You have to look at individual members of Congress and assign blame REGARDLESS of the party they belong to-
-
80%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well ADAGUY since you seem to have all of the answers, why don't you tell me who I voted for
Reply
Since you don't have a clue, I'll tell you
I voted against anyone who voted for the bailout in the last election
My House member got my vote for the first time ever because he voted against the bailout
I voted against the Senator who was up for re-election because he voted for the bailout
I voted against each of the presidential candidates because they supported the bailout
Now why don't you tell me how easy it was for you to vote - straight Democratic ticket-
-
-
67%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't make assumptions Beeboppin71
Reply
If you followed what I said during the campaign, the choice was between "horrible" and "absolutely horrendous"
I don't vote for either of those choices
I wrote in Ron Paul
He was the only one who understood the economic meltdown and had solutions
How about you Beeboppin71
Which bought and paid for candidate did you vote for?-
-
100%
Beeboppin7112 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I didn't follow what you said during the campaign. I was far more interested in what the candidates had to say. And for your information, asking a question is NOT making an assumption.
Reply
I proudly voted for Barack Obama. But then again, I'm not a single issue voter.
-
-
-
-
-
-
60%
THOMNH6212 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
this is a case of the left creating an economic disaster and blaming everyone else, it was the community reinvestment act that started it all. Watch closely and learn if your open minded if not then you are not open to the truth and keep spouting your lies.
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4=iv_id=e...-
-
80%
CRYMTYPHON12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Giving poor Americans afordable mortgages did not wreck the American economy.
Reply
8 years of war charged to the deficit
while giving tax cuts to the rich who re-invested in asia and central amercia, -
tax cuts that were again charged to the deficit, -
- that broke the bank.
Just like we said it would.
We said it here; in Propeller; we were very clear.
And cons replied that the economy was fine,
we were spitefully painting the bush economy bleak,
deficits weren't so bad, what we needed were even more tax cuts, and less regulation, -
Don't tell us about Carter 40 years ago.
Tell us why you were wrong the last 8 years, -
and how you intend to make things right. -
-
-
-
-
-
88%
HannibalBarca12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Are you implying that this is a new phenomena brought on by Obama?
Reply
It has been going on before he was born, both sides, almost all politicians; but your hate of one man puts it all in his lap; and he isn't even in office.
Do you have any problem at all with your present V.P. and hallibortion? May not be lobbying, but it sure stinks of corruption of some sort. -
88%
Lurch12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama refused to take any money from registered federal lobbyists.
Reply
McCain not only welcomed that money, he begged the lobbyists to run his campaign, and they gladly did. McCain had 160 lobbyists running his campaign at one point, Obama zero.
Albeit a mountain of logical reasons existed, you need look no further than how these two addressed the problem of corruption than to see why Obama beat McCain in such an incredible landslide.
-
-
-
67%
tchef12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Bush administration itself ignored warnings about the mortgage crisis. They wanted to keep the housing boom going for as long as they could because it was the only thing holding up the economy.
Reply
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/12/bush-administ...-
100%
nostalgia12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Try reading this with links to all of the warnings from the Bush administration:
Reply
Bush Administration Warnings About Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
http://exposingliberallies.blogspot.com/2008/09/bu...
Of course you are probably more interested in keeping your head in the sand -
75%
JohnGault12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We need to stop with the finger pointing. This is not a party line issue. Blame can be put on both sides and on ourselves. The Government did not force us to take out these loans. They did not force us to take the equity out of our homes and spend it.
Reply
We elect our officials based on the decisions that they make (well myth, hoping it were true) So do research on YOUR official on what they did and vote accordingly.-
80%
Lurch12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
> The Government did not force us to take out these loans. They did not force us to take the equity out of our homes and spend it.
Reply
The govt did not force the banks to lend us money they knew could not be repaid.
The govt did not force the banks to lie while reselling bad loans for more profit.
The govt did not force the brokers to lie to us about what we can afford.
The govt did not force the underwriters to knowingly approve loans that could not be repaid.
The govt did not force brokers to help sell us on homes we could not afford.
There were several stakeholders in every single subprime foreclosure and any one of which, if they had done the right thing, would have/could have prevented that foreclosure.
But the difference here is that only the homeowner lost everything; life savings, home, pride, credit rating, and more.
All the others who were nearly, just as, and often much more guilty than the homeowner all profited.
Where is the justice? Where is their accountability? Where is the outrage? -
-
-
-
33%
lanewalk12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm constantly surprised by being given information which would indicate one party is responsible for a problem when it is normaly, as in this case, both parties which makes it easier for one to point the finger at the other than defend their own responsibility in creating the problem.
Reply
In this case, the needed support from the major democrats on the banking committee was already bought so naturally they lobbied to get support from members of the party that had somme members who were vocally supporting legislation they didn't want passed.
Both Clinnton and Bush introduced legislation to increase regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and neither could get it passed.
Neither party has clean hands in this.-
100%
CRYMTYPHON12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I had to read that 4 times, slowly, before I disagreed with it.
Reply
You sound wonderfuly fair; let's not point fingers, everyone has a share of the blame, etc.
But Ybdogsct has done his homework a little too well here,
and a little too clearly.
If both parties have some blame, the portions are very unequal.
-
-
-
100%
CHAM12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Neither Party is Clean in all this." I couldn't agree more. But since I am neither Republican nor Democrat, it's probably easier for me to say that.
Reply
But I do blame the Republicans the most because they had both the Senate, the House, and the White House for six years and when they could finally deregulate ( as was their plan from yore ) they did so and brought our country to its knees.
Supposedly the Republican Party, the party of the Religious Right couldn't muster up enough moral citizens to do good for the country. Instead they and their Christian claimers enabled the most immoral and vile Government this country has ever had to suffer thru.
For this I have called for the end of the Republican Party. Let them go into the dust bin of history having been branded exactly as they should "The party of Special Interests" as opposed to the Party of the People.
And four years from now if the Democrats have decided to swill in the fruits of immoral, unethical, corrupt, special interest Governance, hopefully long before then Americans will be forming a party to send the Democrats to live with the Republicans in the dust bin and let a new party emerge, one that actually will keep its Fidelity with the people who they are supposed to represent - those who elected them. -
100%
make_my_day12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm a right of center voter now, although I used to be a Democrat. After reading a number of the above posts, and following a number of the attached links, I've come to the conclusion that both parties probably have about an equal share of the blame for the current mess we are in now. The Republicans have at least this one right.......The problem here IS the government! They are ALL incompetent and/or dishonest. There are too many competing interests, and having one party dominance is not going to solve anything either. I think they ALL should get turned out. These politicians gain too much power and influence by having numerous successive terms. There should be term limits for congress, just like the president. These government political positions were not meant to be lifetime careers. They all get too comfortable with the salaries, perks, lobbyist money and multi-million dollar campaign war chests. I am sick of, and totally disillusioned with politics. I may go back to voting Libertarian, when I didn't like either candidate. I'm definitely FOR having strong 3rd party candidates. The two-party system we have now, is TOTALLY ineffective. I think that the next time around, everyone with more than two terms under their belts should be sent home, and we get a new person.
Reply-
100%
CHAM12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Make my day Term Limits are a good thing. Wonder what happened when we approved of term limits? Seems some of the old school went to the Supreme Court and got Term Limits snipped in the bud.
Reply
Are you in favor of a Constitutional Convention? It is allowed by the Constitution and the pre-requisite things have been to to call one and they have been submitted to the proper authorities. Nothing happened.
The two Party System is totally ineffective - for the people that is. It serves the corrupt quite well.
That is why I call for the end of the Republican Party. They stood up for the vilest Administration in our history. Criminal activity is best quelled with punishment. I think it wold be fitting punishment to end their party.
I will never again vote Republican. I will join in the implementation of Term Limits.-
100%
make_my_day12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I would like to see term limits for congress, AND for the Democrats and Republicans to stop getting in the way of 3rd party candidates getting on ballots. The only way the people are going to get better representation is to start cleaning house. It's the ONLY power we have left. Something has to be done!! I don't agree that Republicans should be banned. If you are at all objective, you have to admit both parties are equally corrupt. There are good representatives on both sides, but their eternal incumbency is the biggest problem we have.
Reply-
100%
CHAM12 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree both are equally bad. And I agree that we desperately need a viable third party to "punish" a wayward party. The reason I come down hard on the Republican Party ( I was a lifelong Republican until Bush, who I voted for in 2000 went nuts ), is because they brought this creep back in in 2004 and not only that staunch Republicans defended this maniac right up to this election and still defend his malfeasance.
Reply
And both parties stood up for their "man". I think every elected and appointed official in Washington that took up for these two creeps should loose their position in Congress.
I felt the same way about Clinton. I thought he was the worst president ever until Bush got going.
Now I am an Independent. There are 135 Independent parties. Two years ago I started to try to get a Coalition of Independents organized. I contacted quite a few but none were interested in joining up with someone who didn't line up with every plank in their agenda. As a result they are worth less than nothing. They are the strongest thing going for the two corrupt parties we have.
But if enough Americans would join together and vow to return governance to the Constitution and practice bring the corrupt and their friends to trial, I think this country could return to its former standing in the World as the beacon of Liberty, Morality, and Ethical behavior.
This is how I feel about America, we need to remove the bad apples. Actually you and I think much alike.
-
-
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.