Sen. Warren Slams Regulators for Failure to Prosecute Big Banks
Warren: 'I am really concerned that too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial'
At her debut on the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee on Thursday, freshman Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) grilled a panel of top financial regulators on their lack of prosecution of banks' criminal activities with repeated emphasis on one particular question: "When was the last time you took a Wall Street bank to trial?"
Educating the panel on the value of taking a bank to trial, Warren explains:
If [banks] can break the law and drag in billions in profits and then turn around and settle paying out of those profits, they don't have that much incentive to follow the law. It's also the case that when we have a settlement, and not a trial, it means that we don't have those days and days and days of testimony of what those financial institutions have been up to.
The question I really want to ask is about how tough you are -- about how much leverage you really have.
The regulators--representing the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Reserve, and the Treasury among others--responded with predictable platitudes: "We have not had to do it as a practical matter to achieve our supervisory goals," said one and, "When we look at these issues [...] we look at the distinction between what we could get if we go to trial and what we could get if we don't," answered another.
Ryan Grim, writing for the Huffington Post, points out that open-Internet pioneer Aaron Swartz was one of Warren's constituents who she reportedly both met and admired.
Swartz recently committed suicide after being hounded by federal prosecutors over a "harsh array of charges" because they wanted to "make an example" of his activism--a point that Warren may have referenced in her remarks.
"I want to note that there are district attorneys and US attorneys who are out there every day squeezing ordinary citizens on sometimes very thin grounds and taking them to trial to 'make an example,' as they put it," Warren told the group.
"I am really concerned that too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial. That just seems wrong to me."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
At her debut on the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee on Thursday, freshman Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) grilled a panel of top financial regulators on their lack of prosecution of banks' criminal activities with repeated emphasis on one particular question: "When was the last time you took a Wall Street bank to trial?"
Educating the panel on the value of taking a bank to trial, Warren explains:
If [banks] can break the law and drag in billions in profits and then turn around and settle paying out of those profits, they don't have that much incentive to follow the law. It's also the case that when we have a settlement, and not a trial, it means that we don't have those days and days and days of testimony of what those financial institutions have been up to.
The question I really want to ask is about how tough you are -- about how much leverage you really have.
The regulators--representing the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Reserve, and the Treasury among others--responded with predictable platitudes: "We have not had to do it as a practical matter to achieve our supervisory goals," said one and, "When we look at these issues [...] we look at the distinction between what we could get if we go to trial and what we could get if we don't," answered another.
Ryan Grim, writing for the Huffington Post, points out that open-Internet pioneer Aaron Swartz was one of Warren's constituents who she reportedly both met and admired.
Swartz recently committed suicide after being hounded by federal prosecutors over a "harsh array of charges" because they wanted to "make an example" of his activism--a point that Warren may have referenced in her remarks.
"I want to note that there are district attorneys and US attorneys who are out there every day squeezing ordinary citizens on sometimes very thin grounds and taking them to trial to 'make an example,' as they put it," Warren told the group.
"I am really concerned that too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial. That just seems wrong to me."
At her debut on the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee on Thursday, freshman Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) grilled a panel of top financial regulators on their lack of prosecution of banks' criminal activities with repeated emphasis on one particular question: "When was the last time you took a Wall Street bank to trial?"
Educating the panel on the value of taking a bank to trial, Warren explains:
If [banks] can break the law and drag in billions in profits and then turn around and settle paying out of those profits, they don't have that much incentive to follow the law. It's also the case that when we have a settlement, and not a trial, it means that we don't have those days and days and days of testimony of what those financial institutions have been up to.
The question I really want to ask is about how tough you are -- about how much leverage you really have.
The regulators--representing the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Reserve, and the Treasury among others--responded with predictable platitudes: "We have not had to do it as a practical matter to achieve our supervisory goals," said one and, "When we look at these issues [...] we look at the distinction between what we could get if we go to trial and what we could get if we don't," answered another.
Ryan Grim, writing for the Huffington Post, points out that open-Internet pioneer Aaron Swartz was one of Warren's constituents who she reportedly both met and admired.
Swartz recently committed suicide after being hounded by federal prosecutors over a "harsh array of charges" because they wanted to "make an example" of his activism--a point that Warren may have referenced in her remarks.
"I want to note that there are district attorneys and US attorneys who are out there every day squeezing ordinary citizens on sometimes very thin grounds and taking them to trial to 'make an example,' as they put it," Warren told the group.
"I am really concerned that too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial. That just seems wrong to me."