SEC’s suit against Goldman Sachs makes GOP hesitant to back Wall Street
A little more than a week ago, Mitch McConnell had whipped his caucus firmly into line, and all 41 Republican senators had signed a letter criticizing the Democrats’ financial reform proposal — indicating the GOP was likely to filibuster on the measure. McConnell said Democrats should start from scratch on Wall Street reform, the same tactic the GOP has used with health care reform.
But it now looks like the GOP is changing tactics. Bob Corker and Richard Shelby have told reporters that they are busy negotiating with Democrats to pass Wall Street reform. Could it be that the SEC’s lawsuit against Goldman Sachs, which is dominating the headlines and reminding Americans of Wall Street follies, has made the GOP skeptical about opposing Wall Street reform?
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee who’s been in financial reform talks with chairman Chris Dodd, tells TPMDC’s Brian Beutler that an agreement is close at hand.
“We’re very close to a deal and there will be a substantial number of Republicans that go along with it,” Shelby said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he expects to bring the bill to the Senate floor at the end of this week or early next week.
Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), another financial reform negotiator who had dinner last night with Shelby, said today he expects all 100 senators to vote to begin debate on the bill. Corker guessed the final bill would be able to pass with 70 or 80 votes.
Of course, the GOP could be stalling, waiting for the Goldman Sachs lawsuit to fade from the headlines. That’s what they did with health care reform — pretend to negotiate in good faith when they clearly had no intention of voting for a health care bill. Max Baucus and two other Democrats spent months negotiating with three Republicans, to no available. Not a single GOP senator voted for health care legislation.
But the delay allowed the Republicans to redefine health care legislation as a miserable bit of socialism, turning public opinion against it.
Chris Dodd should be wary of GOP delays on Wall Street reform. He ought to have a bill ready for a vote in the next two weeks.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
122 comments Add your comment
Metro Coach
April 21st, 2010
3:13 pm
Financial “reform” that will regulate everything except Fanny and Freddie, which were as much a cause of the latest recession as any other firm. The GOP didn’t intend to vote for a health care package that included only big government solutions as opposed to solutions that actually work. Does Obama enjoy having you attached to his hindquarters 24 hours a day? I would think Michelle might have a problem with it.
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
3:23 pm
I read that the Goldman suit is just the tip of the iceberg. I suspect there will be a lot more where that came from. It’s a good thing.
The GOP has no choice but to back financial reform….
Libertarian
April 21st, 2010
3:25 pm
Someone has to say it: From CNN (not fox)- According to Federal Election Commission figures compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Goldman Sachs’ political action committee and individual contributors who listed the company as their employer donated $994,795 during 2007 and 2008 to Obama’s presidential campaign, the second-highest contribution from a company PAC and company employees.
Perhaps he should give it back?
And the “evil republican” John McCain only got $230,000 from Goldman.
Libertarian
April 21st, 2010
3:26 pm
Serves Goldman and their employees right…they helped elect him with that $1 million.
Peadawg
April 21st, 2010
3:27 pm
http:// theweek. com/ article/ index /202118/ Should_Obama_return_his_Goldman_Sachs_contributions
“Should Obama return his Goldman Sachs contributions?
The bank that’s just been accused of fraud by the SEC donated $1 million to Obama in ‘08. Should he give the money back?”
Yes, he should!!!
Ryan
April 21st, 2010
3:27 pm
It wasn’t as much the financial institutions that cause the fall the economy as it was the people who bought things (i.e. houses, cars, boats, ect.) who knew they couldn’t afford it. Actually I guess the CEOs of the big banks were just as stupid for lending the money ans the people who borrowed it.
Libertarian
April 21st, 2010
3:28 pm
Furthermore: According to figures dating to 1990, Goldman Sachs’ PAC and employees have consistently contributed more money to Democratic rather than Republican candidates for federal office.
In the 2008 election, three out of every four dollars contributed by Goldman Sachs went to Democrats.
Since the 2008 election, FEC reports indicate that Goldman Sachs has contributed generously to Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services Committee members. The two panels are responsible for oversight of the industry.
Your prescious Dems are just as corrupt as Republicans. All you liberals talk about big bad wall street but your democratic senators are accepting their donations and are in their back pockets. I give up…all politicians are corrupt, money rules all and determines who gets elected…end of story.
Reality
April 21st, 2010
3:29 pm
@Metro –
You are plain ‘ol wrong. The primary cause of the financial melt down was the formation of “derivatives” that were bundled failing mortages by institutions like Goldman.
It was NOT caused by the origination of mortgages.
Reality
April 21st, 2010
3:30 pm
@Peadawg,
Your pure and clear hatred for Obama really does discount most everything your write.
Waltzing Nannie
April 21st, 2010
3:30 pm
Do you feel good about the SCE bringing a suit in coordination with a legislative initiative? Does that kind of power maeke you feel more comfortable or less comfortable with the Obamacrats? Would it be ok if the govenment used it prosecutorial powers every time it had a law it wanted passed?
You do remember that bringing a suit is very different from winning one. Right?
Don’t get me wrong..I think Goldman was both corrupt and involved in our financial meltdown. I also think they had FAR too cozy a relationship with both Bush and Obama.
Did Tucker mention that the former White House Counsel now works for Goldman?
I didn’t think so. Doesn’t that make you wonder a little bit when the liberal media leaves out such an obviously juicy fact?
Kamchak
April 21st, 2010
3:30 pm
Financial “reform” that will regulate everything except Fanny and Freddie, which were as much a cause of the latest recession as any other firm.
Fannie, Freddie, CRA, ACORN—-SQUIRREL
Libertarian
April 21st, 2010
3:31 pm
@Reality CT seems like she has pure hatred for all things Republican. What does that say about her writing?
Shawny
April 21st, 2010
3:34 pm
This post is convoluted.
First, Goldman Sachs Wall Street. They are (were) a corruptly ran firm that traded on the NYSE on Wall Street. Corruption needs to be fixed, but do not confuse this with other legitimately ran financial instutions or publicly traded corporations in general. It makes it sound like big corporations are bad, and that is wrong.
As bills are crafted, they change. It is quite possible that the first drafts of the bill appeared to need to be tossed out completely. Then after working it out, it may have become a bill worthy of consideration. Therefore, it is getting in position for debate. That is a normal process. It is not an indication of anyone flip-flopping on their general position, but rather having certain criteria met in order to support something.
And finally, securities trading legislation health care reform. Why even bring up this comparison. The former is refining regulations so that a critical industry does not implode again. The latter is the first step toward socialized medicine and is not good law.
A whole lot of apples and a whole lot of oranges.
Shawny
April 21st, 2010
3:36 pm
Post clarification, since symbols did not insert. I meant that Goldman Sachs DOES NOT EQUAL Wall Street.
And securities trading legislation DOES NOT EQUAL health care reform.
Cosby Smith
April 21st, 2010
3:36 pm
Ahh..Cynthia…Still beating the anti GOP drum. Grow up…Congress …Both parties..are ripping this country apart while spending it into the poor house. Strange, the SEC apparently broke from tradition and normal procedures regarding this lawsuit. Wonder if The White House had any say in that. Also, remember, The Government, in its bail out wisdom, allowed Lehman Brothers to go under while they chose to keep Goldman. From Fannie and Freddie (controlled by Barnie Fife) to picking which financial institution would be bailed out, all while the working stiffs pay the price. My bet is that if a thorugh investigation were allowed, many on Capital Hill including Obama would have dirt on their hands.
Peadawg
April 21st, 2010
3:38 pm
“Your pure and clear hatred for Obama really does discount most everything your write.”
Truth hurts much??
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
3:45 pm
Seems some republicans understand that new rules for Wall Street
are required to prevent another meltdown.
They’ll probably do a bit more whining and moaning but,
I think we’ll get Grassley, Corker, Snowe, Shelby, Chambliss, Hutchinson and Hatch…..
Millie
April 21st, 2010
3:49 pm
While regulation of wall street is required, my confidence in the democrats to not create more problems than they prevent is zero.
PearlJam
April 21st, 2010
3:55 pm
The Obama administration and Goldman Sachs are working together. This is all a fraud to get our tax payer money back in the hands of Wall Steet execs and Obama’s admistration.
See below
Dianna Farrell:
Obama Administration: Deputy Director, National Economic Council
Former Goldman Sachs Title: Financial Analyst
Stephen Friedman:
Obama Administration: Chairman, President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-)
Gary Gensler:
Obama Administration: Commissioner, Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance
Robert Hormats:
Obama Administration: Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State Department
Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Group
Philip Murphy:
Obama Administration: Ambassador to Germany
Former Goldman Sachs Title: Head of Goldman Sachs, Frankfurt
Mark Patterson:
Obama Administration: Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner
Former Goldman Sachs Title: Lobbyist 2005-2008; Vice President for Government Relations
John Thain:
Obama Administration: Advisor to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner
Former Goldman Sachs Title: President and Chief Operating Officer (1999-2003)
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:00 pm
PearlJam
Not quite accurate….we already have all of Goldmans money, buried in the White House vegetable garden.
Now we are going after yours.
What’s that home address again? We’d like to get the U-Hail there tonight.
ctucker
April 21st, 2010
4:05 pm
Ryan, You are so wrong about that. Read the Wall Street Journal
Kamchak
April 21st, 2010
4:06 pm
Granny Godzilla
I thought our first priority was to make everyone get gay married.
Robert
April 21st, 2010
4:09 pm
Wall Street v. Government- truly a battle of the incompetent and greedy
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:09 pm
Kamchak
That’s what the money is for.
Can’t force them to get gay married without nice flowers, a caterer,
really sharp coordinated outfits and KC and the Sunshine band.
It wouldn’t be fittin’.
Peadawg
April 21st, 2010
4:13 pm
Cynthia, do you think Obama should give back his donations from Goldman Sachs?
Robert
April 21st, 2010
4:15 pm
Pearljam- these folks are too greedy, lazy, and incompetent to conspire. Rahm is running around in locker rooms trying to intimidate folks while 28 year old ivy league mbas are trying to master rural mississippi mortgages- truly a comedy.
PearlJam
April 21st, 2010
4:16 pm
Granny Godzilla – What’s not accurate? are you saying these people are not apart of Obamas admistration or did not work for Golman.
Are you saying the lawyer for Golman Sachs is not Greg Craig, He is the same Greg Graig Obama had on his side investigating the Air Force One Flyover New York, worked with Obama on closing Gitmo, now he’s representing Goldman Sachs, give me a break. Yes the same Greg Craig that represented Castro for Elian Gonzales case against US.
Funny how all these Goldman Sachs employees are “Fat Cats” until they work for Obama then all of a sudden they turn out to be great people.
Reality
April 21st, 2010
4:17 pm
I am confused about some of you republican making comments….
First, you say that Obama is going after Goldman in some coordinated effort with the SEC (which is total BS).
Then, you say that Obama is ‘in bed’ with Goldman and site money he got from them and people from his past that are current Goldman employees.
Which is it, you confused people?
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:20 pm
Pearl Jam
What’s no accurate?
You claim that “The Obama administration and Goldman Sachs are working together. This is all a fraud to get our tax payer money back in the hands of Wall Steet execs and Obama’s admistration.”
That’s paranoid nonsense.
Reality
April 21st, 2010
4:20 pm
Well? Does Obama like Goldman or not?
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:21 pm
Reality
Seems they want it both ways.
Who can blame them though….The GOP was against financial reform before they were for it….
T-Town
April 21st, 2010
4:23 pm
Having my tea and enjoying the bantering from both sides.
PearlJam
April 21st, 2010
4:27 pm
Granny Godzilla -
Look a TARP as example:
Many Wall Street banks were able to pay their loans back quicker then expected
but
Unemployment and foreclosures continue to plague the economy and still today The stability of the financial system remains uncertain.
Remember when they said TARP was about Main Street and not about Wall Street. People like me were saying no, but people like you were saying
“That’s paranoid nonsense”.
PearlJam
April 21st, 2010
4:28 pm
I need Cynthia to come in and back me up
Peadawg
April 21st, 2010
4:29 pm
“Which is it, you confused people?”
I would ask Obama the same thing. Why is he pushing for financial reform when he took donations from the people? Which is it, you confused POTUS?
Peadawg
April 21st, 2010
4:30 pm
“The GOP was against financial reform before they were for it….”
And from the donations Obama took…so was he!!!
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:31 pm
Pearl Jam
Your original claim remains paranoid nonsense.
Your second post….just angry nonsense.
I do however respect and defend your right to think it’s real.
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:34 pm
Peadawg
Nonsense too, unless a you or they consider a civil suit (most likely only the first suit) quid pro quo.
That wouldn’t be too bright.
ctucker
April 21st, 2010
4:41 pm
Peadawg, Why should he? I think it’s great that he took their money and is now attempting to rein them in. The contribution didn’t buy them anything.
Dee keith
April 21st, 2010
4:43 pm
Barney Frank was on Chris Matthews about a week ago, and he described Mitch McChinless’ characterization of financial reform as being “Willfull ignorance, or blatant dishonesty.” I’ve often said when it comes to conservatives the former is driven by the latter. Because conservative politicians don’t think their followers are very smart, they have no problem going out in front of the cameras telling a FLAT OUT lie about something they know can easily be disproven. Repugnants know they cannot oppose Wall Street reform, so they have resulted to attacking the SEC with Beckian style conspiricy theories, as well as spinning their opposition letter as a break through on negotiations. All this to cover up for their meeting with Wall Street bankers to craft opposition to regulation, the Frank Luntz hack memo, and John Boner’s bold siding with Wall Street to obstruct reform. For the record I don’t put a lot of stock in the Dems. reform as being tough on Wall Street, at the end of the day it will be a bill that will be a balance between making it look like they are doing their jobs as politicians, and keeping open their campaign coffers.
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:49 pm
I see that Moody’s has been subpoenaed….
ctucker
April 21st, 2010
4:49 pm
dee keith, you could be right about the bill, but I’m hoping for more
Dotcalm
April 21st, 2010
4:55 pm
Deregulation, as it was first promulgated by Reaganauts (a.k.a. Reaganuts), as an escape from “big guverment” was scoffed at and derided by Bush senior when he ran against Ronnie in the GOP primary. Bush Sr. called Ron’s magic recipe for making annoying taxes and regulations go away “Voodoo economics.” But Ronnie got the nomination and hired chefs to start cooking. One of the kooks in the kitchen got a whiff of sanity and defected (David Stockman, OMB director). But the cult of Reaganomics still dominates GOP “thinking” in its grandiose morbid stupidity: taxing people causes big bad gov’t to buy traffic lights and red stop signs and put lines on the roads and make rules….shame on bad gov’t. Grow up Repubs. And your other mantra “socialized medicine” has got to go too. If that’s what they’ve got in the U.K. Ireland, the rest of Europe, Japan, S. Korea, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, then we could sure use some. To hear you squawk about the threatening cloud of “socialized medicine” is as pathetic as North Koreans (or the former East Germans) reaffirming to each other that the fortified walls keep them safe from the rest of the world.
Kamchak
April 21st, 2010
4:56 pm
Granny Godzilla
Good! I’ve been linking this story for weeks bout how Moody’s sold their ratings.
Granny Godzilla
April 21st, 2010
4:57 pm
Kamchak
Amazing what some folks don’t know…..
Peadawg
April 21st, 2010
5:03 pm
“Peadawg, Why should he?”
It’s very hypocritical of him to not give back the donations. I doubt he said a f-ing thing about financial reform when taking those donations.
blutto
April 21st, 2010
5:04 pm
CT: “I think it’s great that he took their money and is now attempting to rein them in. The contribution didn’t buy them anything.”
The same cannot be said for the hopey-changey believers who gave him their money and votes. Those contributions bought them and the nation more bloated government, extremely foolish spending and a very naive foreign policy. But not to worry, the grownups will be back in charge after the 2010 and 2012 elections.
Some Guy
April 21st, 2010
5:07 pm
I find it curious that the SEC files suit against Goldman just around time financial reform comes around the bend. I also find it curious that the same exact Dem Senator and our current President who are for this current legislation were against reforming the GSE’s Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2005 which caused the majority of the problems by buying bad mortgages. Why are they not included in this current legislation?
blutto
April 21st, 2010
5:12 pm
Dotcalm: “If that’s what they’ve got (socialized medicine) in the U.K. Ireland, the rest of Europe, Japan, S. Korea, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, then we could sure use some.”
Why sure! That is precisely why most Americans flock to those places whenever they need health care.
annodomini77
April 21st, 2010
5:29 pm
“4 The chariots storm through the streets, rushing back and forth through the squares. They look like flaming torches; they dart about like lightning.” (Bible, Nahum 2:4)
“16″For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (Bible, New Testament, John 3:16)
Men readily believe what they want to believe. (Caesar)
Saint Augustine said that if you want to believe you believe.