A number of people have asked me what I think about the financial reform bill that was finally passed by the Senate. I don’t think I have much to add to what I’ve said already, but here’s one more angle.
“We can’t legislate wisdom or passion. We can’t legislate competency. All we can do is create the structures and hope that good people will be appointed who will attract other good people.”
That’s what Christopher Dodd said about the bill, as quoted by The New York Times. It’s become a commonplace observation by now that the reform bill, instead of making structural changes to the financial sector, instead increases regulators’ discretionary powers to constrain — or not constrain — the behavior of the industry.
As a result, the success of reform, in the words of its supposed architect, depends on hoping that presidents will appoint good people and that that will be enough to attract people to being regulators.
Senator Dodd should already know how that works out. After all, he was in the Senate when George W. Bush appointed John Dugan, James Gilleran, and Christopher Cox to head the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, respectively. And we already know what the Republicans think of financial regulation, given their overwhelming resistance to reform.
We can expect a little better from the Obama administration, which did appoint Gary Gensler to head the CFTC and still might do the obvious thing and appoint Elizabeth Warren to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Board. But still, hoping for a few good people–and hoping that presidents will find and appoint those good people–isn’t much of a strategy.
The underlying problem is that the bill doesn’t do anything to change the basic balance of power between Wall Street and Washington, which is partly based on the fact that it’s a lot better to be a banker than to be a regulator, and the only reason to be a regulator (if you believe in free-market incentives) is so you can then become a banker. As Bill Gross, king of the bond market and no one’s populist, said to The Wall Street Journal, “Wall Street still owns Washington. Better to have appointed [Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul] Volcker ‘Dictator-In-Chief’ than to have let the lobbyists dilute what needed to be done.” (Scroll to the bottom and click through the experts in the “Grading the Bill” feature; thanks to Larry Doyle for finding the link.) So we’re left with hope.
Yes, I’m still sticking to my position that the bill is better than nothing. The alternative was sticking with the environment that gave us a bloated, predatory financial system and the financial crisis. But it’s still a missed opportunity. And over the next couple years, as regulators (lobbyists) write the rules necessary to implement the bill, we’ll find out if anything really has changed.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.