Brown Says He'll Filibuster Finance Bill

(CBS)  While saying that President Obama has politicized the debate over financial reform, Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., said today on CBS' "Face the Nation" that he is opposed to the Democrats' proposed legislation to overhaul America's banking system and would filibuster if it came to a vote.

Host Bob Schieffer noted that each day seems to bring more outrage about Wall Street banking practices, yet minority leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has come out against financial reforms that Democrats want to bring to the Senate floor, claiming it will enable future taxpayer-funded bailouts of banks. President Obama called McConnell's assertion about bailouts the exact opposite of what the bill would allow, and characterized the Republican leader's comments as "cynical and deceptive."

Brown told <>Schieffer that he disagreed with Mr. Obama's position, and stands with McConnell.

"I think the president's political arm is now taking over this debate," said Brown. "It's unfortunate because I, like many others in my state and throughout the country, want banks to be banks. I don't want them to be casinos and take risky bets on our money. I think that this is an issue that we can clearly come to common ground on and just solve the problem."

Brown suggested that the financial reform bill in its current form would hurt Massachusetts. He specifically referenced Liberty Mutual and Mass Mutual as companies that would be adversely affected, claiming that the bill would lose the country 25,000 to 35,000 jobs.

Schieffer asked how Brown could make that claim.

"I can say it very clearly because the regulations that are trying to reel in with some of the risky hedging they're doing also affects companies like I described in Massachusetts," he said. "Secretary [of the Treasury Tim] Geithner has some of the same criticisms of the bill in that it doesn't end the bailout mentality of the big banks are too big to fail concept."

He continued, "In addition there are a lot of things in the [Sen. Chris] Dodd (D-Conn.) bill that are just bad for business, small businesses in particular. And we should do better. I called the president out the other day and the administration to do better and stop politicizing these issues and just start solving problems."

"Don't you think that Sen. McConnell might be a little bit guilty of politicizing when he comes out and just said flatly, 'No! We're against it'?" asked Schieffer.

"[McConnell's] not saying no to financial reform, unless I'm mistaken, because that's never the impression I've gotten," said Brown. "Throughout our caucuses that issue has been in the forefront with the teams that are negotiating with the banking chairmen to try to find common sense reforms and address situations like the one that I just pointed out, where companies are caught in the big web, when you have government interfering in business, small businesses' lives and just throwing a 'one size fits all' approach just to score political points.

"It's sad," he added, "And to politicize it - it's clear what they're doing with - you know, trying to score points, and [Obama] should do better.

Last week the SEC claimed that Goldman Sachs defrauded its customers that bought investments tied to subprime mortgages by failing to inform its customers about the inherent risks of those investments. Brown said the large Wall Street banks had acted as casinos, not banks.

"I'm glad the SEC is doing [its] job," said Brown. "They should bring those charges because it's wrong and we should do something about it. That's not what the [financial reform] bill does. The bill actually captures a lot of other things that really, in other institutions, that have played no role in what we're talking about."

Brown claimed his opposition to the financial reform bill was not based on partisanship but a desire to see a different approach. When asked what should be done to get financial reform moving in place of the Dodd bill that he opposes, Brown said, "The next step is to put people in a room and start solving problems, as evidenced by what I've tried to do, which is to vote with the Democrats and be the 60th vote - or be the 41st vote. Washington is broken. People are hurting. They want us to do better. We should do better."

He didn't offer specifics about what he thinks should be in a financial reform bill, but said he'd filibuster the current bill rather than let it come to the Senate floor.

"The present bill is not a good bill, period. I have reviewed it. We've analyzed it," he said.

[lakota2012]

Yep....as beady-eyed miNOrity leader mcconnell kept spewing "no more taxpayer bailouts" which was not even in this reform legislation, we have learned that he gets the vast majority of his MONEY from the financial and real estate sector, which he has been protecting from any reform.

Up until yesterday the moronic republiCONS were united against any financial reform legislation -- especially derivatives -- but as the legislation gets stronger with more teeth towards passage, the GOP is singing a completely different tune!

[lakota2012]

It appears that economics is way too challenging for scott brown, and for most republiCONS for that matter. He wrongly stated in that Sunday interview that Mass Mutual/Liberty Mutual would lose between 25K and 35K jobs, and Bob Schieffer caught him on it, and later those two companies basically said he was LYING!

He has no credibility any longer, and being a moron that tries to block good financial sector regulation -- especially derivatives -- that the American people support, will hurt the republiCONS in November!

[chitown639]

Just from watching this interview, I come away believing that Mass. Republican Senator Brown has absolutely no idea what is in the financial reform bill and probably has trouble understanding all of the complexities of reforming Wall Street.

Brown is just blindly following the marching orders of the Republican leadership, he really has no clue of whats going when it comes to financial reform.................

[govmess]

Good for Brown!! As most Americans know today, it takes 60 votes to cut off debate in the Senate, and the Republicans had only 55. To close debate and proceed to the enactment of the committee-passed bill, the Republicans needed five Democrats to vote with them. But in a 45 member Democratic caucus that included Barack Obama and the current Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), these votes could not be found.

Recently, President Obama has taken to accusing others of representing "special interests." In an April radio address he stated that his financial regulatory proposals were struggling in the Senate because "the financial industry and its powerful lobby have opposed modest safeguards against the kinds of reckless risks and bad practices that led to this very crisis."

He should know. As a senator, he was the third largest recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, behind only Sens. Chris Dodd and John Kerry.

With hypocrisy like this at the top, is it any wonder that nearly 80% of Americans, according to new Pew polling, don't trust the federal government or its ability to solve the country's problems?

[babooph]

So a politician says he will blab endlessly about nothing-I guess they do sometimes get truthful...

[calgal4]

This place feels like the "Slow News Day with Empire George Show"

BORING

[Empire-George-]

by calgal4 April 21, 2010 8:55 AM EDT

This place feels like the "Slow News Day with Empire George Show" BORING
_____________

That was yesterday.....Feel free to put on a "show" yourself.

[Coach-1640280]

Congress is Boring

Why is congress so low in opinion polls? Why do so few people vote? Why is congress predominately white male?

Congress is too professional.
Congress is too pretty, neat, and groomed.
Congress is too complex.
Congress is too connected.
Congress is too moneyed.
Congress is too busy.
Congress is too far away.
Congress is too out of touch.
Congress is too indifferent.
Congress is too formal.
Congress is too slick.
Congress is too educated.
Congress is too powerful.
Congress is too threatening.
Congress is too hard to talk to.
Congress is too secretive.
Congress is too lawyered up.
Congress is too elected!

These 18 reasons are why congress is so boring, opinion polls so low, and voting turnout so sluggish. (elitism)

Some of these qualities are good, some are bad, some are true, and some are false. All these qualities are distancing. All these qualities get in the way of citizen identification, interest, and participation.

A sortitioned chamber is a branch of government scientifically, mathematically, and randomly chosen from the citizenry. A sortitioned chamber is instant ?reality show? popular and fascinating. Sortitioned chamber members are ?real? in every ?real? way. Sortitioned chamber member?s approval ratings will always naturally surpass elected chamber?s approval ratings.

This is because:
1. There is no gender, ethnic, economic, religious, or political bias.
2. There is no ?experience?, ?education?, ?intelligence?, ?beauty?, or ?charisma? bias.
3. There is something, somewhere, for everyone to identify.
4. There is no elitism.

A sortitioned chamber receives letters the current congress can?t even dream exist. This is because the 18 distancing qualities (above) of congress do not apply to a sortitioned chamber. Every facet, cranny, and crevice of the citizenry is represented.

A sortitioned chamber is real grass roots, empowered, excited, represented, scientific, and mathematically guaranteed.

I?m an activist because my congress is like me!
I vote because my congress is like me!
I care because my congress is like me!

http://coach-1640280.newsvine.com/

[rickwar]

by Empire-George- April 20, 2010 5:04 PM EDT


"NO they weren't.....many if not all American prospered during the Reagan and Bush,sr presidencies.

I noticed Clinton signing free-trade NAFTA, not "republicans""

PS: signed yes, however bush and Reagan designed the NAFTA treaty and the deal was already done.

History:

In 1988 Canada and the United States signed the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement after the US Congress approved implementing legislation. The American government then entered into negotiations with the Mexican government for a similar treaty, and Canada asked to join the negotiations in order to preserve its perceived gains under the 1988 deal.

Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1991 between the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H.W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it.

In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming president Bill Clinton. Prior to sending it to the House of Representatives, Clinton introduced clauses to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House members. It also required U.S. partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own. The ability to enforce these clauses, especially with Mexico, and with much consideration and emotional discussion the House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by a vote of 234 to 200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. NAFTA passed the Senate 61-38. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; it went into effect on January 1, 1994.

OK, continue the Republican revision of history and keep drinking the parties Kool-Aid

[jscottelwood-2009]

TO: All overpaid, pompous, governmental puppets in Washington.

Who in the hell ever created the "filibuster". Vote it out and let's get some changes done already. You were hired to go to Washington and vote. Get on with it, the country is not impressed by any of your track records. Be very careful, as November is not a great time of the year to start a new career. (Of course you probably have some lobbyists in your pocket).

[noloyalisti]

I think we can all agree that the real enemy is big money from the rich greedy big corporations. They own and run the country for their own excess profit while we fight over the scraps.

The got their government slaves to pass "free" trade agreements, start wars for oil, illegally spy, write laws that provide them entitlements and socialism. And get all of us to pay for it. It is time to take down the top 1%. It is 99% against them in the class war.