Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiBernie Sanders Tackles Too Big to Fail in Two Pages
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced new legislation on Friday that should, he claims, solve the phenomenon of massive and failing financial institutions holding the nation's economy captive.
It's all of two pages long.
The Vermont Democrat-Socialist unveiled the "Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Exist Act" -- which he billed as a succinct remedy for tackling financial risk and avoiding a repeat of the taxpayer-funded bailouts that occurred just one year ago.
The act is straightforward. It would require that 90 days after its passage, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner "submit to Congress a list of all commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds and insurance companies that the Secretary believes are too big to fail."
Subsequently, one year after the law is enacted, the Treasury Secretary would be required to "break up entities included on the Too Big To Fail List, so that their failure would no longer cause a catastrophic effect on the United States or global economy without a taxpayer bailout."
The rest of the details -- like, say, how to do that, how the broken-up entities would be structured, and what authorities would be granted for preempting institutions from becoming too big to fail in the first place -- would be filled in during the legislative process, Sanders's office said. The goal is simply to immediately preempt a duplication of last year's economic meltdown.
"Here is an example of amazing irony," the senator said in a video shot by Brave New Films accompanying the legislation's release. "Three out of the four largest financial institutions in the country who led us to this financial disaster are now bigger then they were before the collapse. So we have got to break these guys up so we don't see a recurrence of what we saw a year ago."
WATCH:
The brevity of the Sanders bill is, in some ways, its selling point. The Senator notes in the video that, "unlike the health care bill, which is 1,990 pages, this is all of two pages." An easier contrast, however, is between the senator's efforts to tackle Too Big To Fail and those being pursued by others in Congress and the White House.
Last week, Geithner, in cahoots with House Financial Services Committee Chair Barney Frank, released a proposal to not only structure a new system for bailing out failing institutions but also for improved regulations over those institutions. Clocking in at 253 pages, the plan would empower regulators to essentially shut down banks or firms that threatened the stability of the economy. Should a bailout be necessary, other financial firms and not the taxpayers would have to front the bill.
READ THE SANDERS BILL:
tbtf -
32 Comments so far
Show Allthe uk has started this already. they broke up a bank last week.
This bill addresses a key question facing the USA: Big good? Or big bad? Cuz most USans were indoctrinated with the freaky idea that big good, big best. This is why the people haven't stampeded Washing-town in the wake of bankster bailouts. It's part of the nationalist indoctrination, the fear that brown people will invade and conquer (AIPAC channels Israel's fears into the USan mind extremely well). The USan ego needs BIG according to plan. Indoctrination occurs in the dark of night. Human nature has strengths and weaknesses. Indoctrination exploits weaknesses and habituates the individual to bandaid the weakness by latching onto overly-simplistic ideas/policies that end up making things even worst. Typically USans will refuse to support Sanders' bill because they need to keep too-big-to-fail banks, to support their egos, because nothing but these monstrous enterprises can support their egos, according to the doctrine. But the tide may be turning... Localism is spreading.
I'd rather have a progressive oligopoly tax. If your corporation controls 30% of a market you pay a small tax. If you control 90% of a market you pay a huge percentage of tax. If your corporation is in no way too big to fail, as most all small businesses are, the federal government ignores you.
The same tax goes for a big box store monopolizing a small town.
Given an oligopoly tax, corporations must choose whether to fission into two pieces for the good of the shareholders (and compete) or pay the stiff tax. It's their choice.
This bill makes too much sense. It will never pass.
Loveya Bernie. We got your back.
Didn't the EU decide to rework the big four a few weeks ago? I havn't heard much coverage here in the US about this. Seems the idea was to take away the too big to fail option and restructure each one into a " good " bank and a " bad " bank. Did I hear that right?
wow, what a stroke of genius. All of two pages?
How about keeping it simple next time and let them fail when their time is due instead of giving them trillions of taxpayer money? Much easier, no law required, all of you can go back to having lunches with your favorite lobbyist.
This article made an error. Sanders is a Socialist Independent, not a Democrat-Socialist !
FOOLPROOF BULLETPROOF
If Bernie's bill goes down, get out the Pitchforks!
Shade of the Shays rebellion...
Nothing against Bernie, but he represents a constituency that is too small to succeed.
The Assimilated Press and Reid's bosses will snuff this before it gets any traction.
Go Bernie. You and the thirty reps in the house are the only representative govt left in America.
I want an amendment rider on that bill that says "From now on no law can be longer than 2 pages."
We must return to a steeply progressive income tax.
Why has the Sherman antitrust act fallen into complete disuse?
Jim Shea
Why? Because that is how the republicans wanted it. Same with the repeal of Glass-Steagal, and the passing of the tax breaks for companies to offshore our jobs, and the complete dismantling of regulation, that has led us to right where we are now.
Those with too much money think that they should be the ones to rule, regardless of what the constitution says. So after Watergate, they decided they didn't like the people calling the shots, and started going about ruining everything so that they would profit and we would lose. They bought and sold congresspeople like they were toy soldiers. They got legislation passed, gave themselves tax breaks, and did everything they could to destroy everything that had been put in place since FDR. They took away your health care, they took away your pension, they took away everything they could and bought up all the news media they could, so they could slant things just the way they want it. Limbaugh even BRAGGED about destroying the greatest social safety net we've ever had. They are PROUD of the raping, pillaging and looting that they have done for the last 30 years. They know that if people are afraid for their jobs and homes, they won't be out protesting policy, and that is EXACTLY what they want. To them, this IS peace. They don't understand what is bound to come along, and I hope it happens soon. Ask Marie Antionette what happens when the people get screwed too much.
Have the Democrats wanted it any less than have the Republicans? The deregulation has taken place mostly during Democratic regimes. The two parties are mirror images of one another when it comes to this. The right hand and the left hand more than the right and left wings.
very WEll-said.
since the Dems and Reps are the left and right hands of the same....
imagine Both hands being used to wipe the behind and then pick up food to the mouth?
NO WONDER america feeds itself with its OWN SHIT! both hands are dirty..from ass to mouth. back and forth. in a never-ending cycle.
sierra7
And, the Democrats just sat, cowering in a corner, sucking their thumbs waiting for Superman to come and save them!
Gimme a break!
As a non-partisan voter I have to call your attention to Bill Clinton's, (and Jimmy Carter for "beginning" the deregulation scheme with the then utilities) signing of the repeal of the Glass/Steagal Act, that even now, the then president of CitiGroup says was a huge mistake.
Both parties are to blame.
Both parties' oversight committees are complicit.
Both parties' legal priorities were not to enforce SEC rules but to compensate the participants, namely the "too big to fail" institutions.
Bernie S. is correct...push Geitner to put up or SHUT THE F$%^& UP about "too big to fail."
Geitner is a Goldman Sachs worm....pure and simple.
We have a government, "Of Goldman Sachs, By Goldman Sachs, and, For Goldman.
My main point is that both political parties are to blame, more or less.
And a darn good point it is.
Sen. Bernie Sanders' proposed bill is essentially an ironic bit of political agit-prop. It would not be necessary if the federal government actually enforced the Sherman Anti-Trust Acts.
I am all for "bust 'em up", but it ignores a lesson that is over 100 years old. After you bust them up you must control them by means of taxation. John D. Rockefeller was busted up or busted up his trust multiple times, but each time grew his empire once again even bigger than before. Every one of these "too big to fail" companies got that way when the income tax structure was changed to allow the decision makers of these corporations to keep obscene amounts of money free from taxation. In each case, the stockholders got screwed, the public got screwed because the public's share of taxes was that much higher, and the decision makers escaped any responsibility for their actions. No one receiving more than $500,000 per year in income should be allowed to keep more than half of it. Close the loopholes and tax credits and return to a realistic minimum tax on high incomes. Starve the monster and it will be too weak to beat the public with a flick of its tail.
Goldman Sachs paid less than 1 per cent of taxes last year. Most Corporations are now off the hook, as well as the mega-rich. Taxes on Corporate profits and an Individual's Income and Capital Gains Tax and all that stuff used to be part of our budget's source of income. GW did a hatchet job on that in the first 6 or 9 months he took office, including the ten-year retroactive tax rebates he gave back to select corporations.
That left the middle-class and poor to pick up the bulk of the budget monies. And now, of course, we are TRILLIONS IN DEBT for the attacks/invasions, occupations, bail-outs, and to all those we borrowed from, like China, who is so lucky to have the debt backed up by our Treasury Bonds and our dollar which is backed up by nothing. Don't hold your breath, China.
/cm
Isn't it ironic that Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower was WAY to the LEFT of the so called "socialist" Obama? 90& tax rate for those making over $500,000/yr. and corporate profits.
I read that he(Ike) ALSO coined the phrase-MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX-corportocracy any one???????
The first draft of Ike's speech referenced the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex. His advisors convinced him to tone it down a bit, but the first draft was precisely on target, in my always humble opinion.
2 pages vs. 2000. Canada's entire Single ayer plan is 14 pages I believe GWNorth told me.
I believe thats all you need to know about how bad this bill is.
Pass this and watch this Presidents numbers go South faster than a rocket. Pass this and say goodbye to your seat unless you are from San Francisco apparently. Pass this and say hello to the GOP because you just handed them the country.
Did you even bother to read the article? First off, it doesn't have a THING to do with health care at all. It's a BANKING bill. And some of us believe that the more things they stack into a law, the worse it's capable of being. A shorter bill is just fine with me. By the time it ever gets through committee (if it ever would), it will be up to 1,000 pages, don't worry.
Jeez, you might try doing something other than making yourself look bad, once in a while.
WJM
And a darn good point you have here too! Although I don't mind looking bad anytime because I am never other than honest about what I say and think.
Yes I read it, but I answered the phone, came back and I was thinking about the health care bill and thats what came out. I am disgusted at their voting on it on a weekend. I had also just come from reading some of the most disgusting comments by a few of the worst people that post here about the Ft. Hood incident. My stomach was challanged by even reading such low trash.
So enough excuse making, we'll just agree I'm stupid. I'll bet you won't argue with that!
Hey, now! I'm the stupid one around these here parts. Ask anyone.
The Ft. Hood incident is troubling and difficult to understand. I'm way too stunned by it to have commented in any way. It just leaves me numb.
Kent (formerly ekaton)
Sic 'em, Bernie!
How Come Department: I live in Tennessee and can't figure out why all the good stuff seems to come from Vermont.
A great idea that will never happen. The good senator is slightly confused. He thinks the government actually controls the corporations, rather than the other way around.
Sanders is correct. When a company gets so big that its failure is a threat to the well-being of the country, it is too big and an existential threat to the country. In this latest crisis, these companies basically demanded a bailout with not strings attached and then used part of the bailout money to enrich themselves with bonuses. The problem with Sanders amendment is the world is now full of these huge conglomerates. Welcome to capitalism gone wild.
If Vermont ever secedes, I'm there.
Joe
The article fails to mention that a reoccurrence of last year's meltdown will cost taxpayers more than last year's meltdown unless Sanders' bill is approved.