Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The win-win politics of health-care reform

This is an interesting tidbit from Noam Scheiber:

On Wednesday, Obama told Dodd and his House counterpart, Barney Frank, that he could more or less live with either version, according to an official knowledgeable about the meeting. (Though he stressed that he’d like to combine the toughest elements of both, as with an exemption from derivatives regulation for non-financial companies, which is stricter in Dodd’s bill.) Mostly, he just encouraged them to press ahead, emphasizing the win-win dynamic at work. If Republicans dig in, the president argued, that’s a fight he’d welcome. (Administration officials have seen polling suggesting that the public will assume Republicans are carrying Wall Street’s water, regardless of their arguments.) And if Republicans want to join in the effort to rein in Wall Street — well, no one at the White House would turn down a big, bipartisan victory.

Also, props to Scheiber for titling his piece "Regulators, Mount Up." Don't get it? Watch the YouTube clip.

By Ezra Klein  |  March 26, 2010; 5:50 PM ET
Categories:  Financial Regulation  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: A thought on financial innovation
Next: Senate rules: Not as important as some would have you think


They also serve, who only regulate.

apologies to Milton (not Friedman), "On His Blindness" (appropriate title, too)

Posted by: bdballard | March 26, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Short Obama: This is just about appearances guys so come up with something, anything, which we'll market as "tough" (if Republicans fight us) or "bipartisan" (if they join us).

Posted by: bmull | March 26, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Catchy tune....I guess! Yes, let's regulate! Bull! If the regulators had done their job in 2005-07 we would not be in this mess. Put the regulators in jail and let the system work! We don't need more government....we need lots less!


Posted by: my4653 | March 26, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Ezra, neither the Dodd nor Frank bills will solve the problems created over the last 30 years. Go talk to DE Senator Ted Kaufman or to Mike Konczal or Simon Johnson or Yves Smith.

No one outside of Wall St and DC thinks the proposals will prevent another financial crisis or create more transparency or restrain unbridled risky speculation.

It's all smoke and mirrors. And the American public will pay the bill for it.

And speaking of paying bills: JPM is about to get a $1.4 billion tax refund because it bought WaMu. Yep, a little remarked or known tax deduction in the Stimulus plan allows companies to take a deduction on the taxes paid over the last 5 years. TARP recipients are excluded, but JPM is claiming it for defunct WaMu. The deduction was meant for small business, but as usual the big guys are reaping the reward. In addition to JPM, retailer Liz Claiborne is set to receive $167 million and - get this! - defunct Circuit City will get $86 million.

Next time I hear a Congressperson complain about the middle class not paying taxes or about how soft and easy it is for the middle class, I'll remember to throw these billion dollar tax deductions back at him.

It also appears as those JPM, UBS, and others will get away with silver manipulations (JPM), and municipal bond corruption (JPM, UBS, etc).

The more I read about Wall St and DC, the more disgusted I get. Why is everyone so bloody enthralled with Wall St?

Even it's so-called innovations actually did little to nothing to grow the economy...and now 6 mega-banks control about 67% of the nation's GDP. Does anyone in his right mind think that's healthy?

Time to throw out the current Fin Reg bills and start over. Put Ted Kaufman in charge.

Posted by: valkayec | March 26, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Man, I love Warren G.

Posted by: MosBen | March 26, 2010 10:57 PM | Report abuse

What valkayec said. See Konczal's 10 page brief re FinRegs.

Also, baselinescenario says Volker is due to give a speech (from the WH?, can't remember) this week. THAT should be interesting and informative too.

Posted by: onewing1 | March 27, 2010 8:46 PM | Report abuse

From baselinescenario's Simon Johnson (March 27, 2010):

"Paul Volcker is poised to make a major speech in Washington on Tuesday. Is Volcker likely to toe the party line and defer to Senator Dodd – or will he lay out in forceful terms what reforms would really mean, i.e., what are the true Volcker principles, who has them, and how would you know?

Financial reform might make for good television after all."

Posted by: onewing1 | March 27, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

"Win-win" means both parties to the situation win, not that you win in either case. That's called "can't lose" or a "no lose proposition". Scheiber needs to go back to cliche class.

Posted by: staticvars | March 27, 2010 11:01 PM | Report abuse

Ezra, it's knowing references like these (regulators, mount up) that make me really appreciate reading folks from my generation, rather than, say, GEORGE WILL. It also doesn't hurt that you're a fellow Bruin.

Obvioulsy a little joking there (I still read Will), but the sentiment remains.

Posted by: bruinseattrojans | March 28, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

You mean the win-win politics of financial regulatory reform?

Posted by: shubik | March 28, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company