Glass - Steagall

            There are a lot of bills, laws and acts that are being talked about in the political field. In the midst of a presidential campaign season there may be things thrown around that we don’t know about. So I’m starting a series to clear up any confusion on some of these things. I’ll provide general information on each item, discuss the positive and the negative and then state where each candidate stands on the issue.

I’ll start today with Glass – Steagall.

Glass – Steagall was an act enacted in 1933 under President FDR. This act established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and controlled speculation. FDR, Carter Glass and Henry Steagall were hoping, with this new act, to prevent another major market crash and another economic depression. They did this with two things, first, speculation control, as speculation was one of the causes (as well as bank running) of the Stock Market crash of 1929 and of the Great Depression and second the FDIC which provided deposit insurance in hopes of preventing any more mass bank runs.

            This was fine, for a while, and the market worked with it for a long time, but then we started to see some changes in the laws. Let me start with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. This act removed the power of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors under the Glass–Steagall Act and Regulation Q to set the interest rates of savings accounts and allowed institutions to charge any interest rates they chose. This of course is laissez – faire economics in the spirit of presidents like Warren G. Harding. After fifty years of successful bank regulation, Jimmy Carter (in attempts to win reelection?) decided to deregulate the banks a bit and gave some of the FDIC’s power to the Federal Reserve.

            Nineteen years later, under President Bill Clinton the Gramm – Leach – Bliley Act is signed into law. This act effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. So under this new law banks could merge and then take your deposited money and use it to gamble on hedge funds. What we saw nine years after the signing of this act was a huge failure of hedge funds, this mixed with the crash of the housing market a year earlier meant the banks were supposedly broke, they didn’t have money to lend was the general opinion. So President Bush enacted TARP, which was bank welfare (some call it reverse socialism).

            In response to these financial crises and the runaway banks Obama initiated the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which is more popularly known as the Dodd – Frank bill (I will talk about that more in depth in a later piece.) This act, while creating more bureaucracy in the federal government, didn’t replace any of the formerly removed integrity of Glass – Steagall, it simply said to the American people, “I hope that you can trust bank bought politicians to regulate the banks.” Some how I for one will have some trouble with that.

            I personally believe that Glass – Steagall in full and original form, is a good thing. The counter argument is that it is a big government law and that it doesn’t allow the free market to thrive. The freedom of capitalism is not the problem here. The problem instead is that we see banks buying politicians and in return politicians are deregulating the banks that are running away with our money. Both the money we deposit into their coffers willingly and the money we unwillingly give them through tax dollars. But I’m not running for president. Let us see what the candidates have to say on this particular issue:

Michele Bachmann: She thinks that Dodd – Frank goes too far and is a Tea Party favorite, so while I cannot find a statement from her on Glass – Steagall, I imagine that she is okay with the fact that it is mostly repealed through the acts mentioned above.

Herman Cain: “Don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks, if you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself.” If I can get away with it, I’m going to go ahead and say this is all that is needed on Herman Cain’s positions on financial and Wall Street reforms.

Newt Gingrich: He was the Speaker of the House responsible for the Gramm – Leach – Bliley bill.

Jon Huntsman Jr.: This was a quote from Jon Huntsman after the October 11^th Bloomberg debate: “I want to return to the spirit of Glass Steagall. You’ve got to look at, fundamentally look at, downsizing some of our banks, looking at some sort of a cap requirement on the size of things. When you have financial institutions of which there are six and any one of them collapsing could cause such dire reverberations in the global economy that it could be catastrophic, it becomes too big to fail. Not Glass-Steagall from the 1930s but something in the spirit of Glass-Steagall, something that would ultimately right-size banks.” ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/12/jon-huntsman-says-somethi_n_1006933.html )

Gary Johnson: In typical Gary Johnson fashion, the former New Mexico governor had this to say: “I understand how that may have exacerbated all this, so I think reinstating it [Glass – Steagall] might be a good thing.” (it is a general quote, but it was in response to this question: TCR: What about Glass-Steagall, the law repealed in the last year of the Clinton administration, that had kept the investment banks and the commercial banks separate? Some people blame the crisis largely on the loss of that law. Do you think we should reinstate it?) You can find the whole interview here: http://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/best-presidential-candidate-no-one-s-heard

Fred Karger: I was not able to find anything in the way of Fred Karger being for or against Glass – Steagall. I will add that he seems to support Occupy Wall Street and has some interesting ideas, such as: Aside from easing the job search for unemployed Americans with a centralized website, Karger would also like to see tax credits given to those who need to relocate to find a job. ( http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/18/karger-praises-occupy-wall-street-proposes-jobs-plan/ )

Barack Obama: See Dodd – Frank and the Volcker rule. Obama is not for Glass – Steagall or he would have pushed for it to be reinstated, but he has implemented these ‘Glass – Steagall lite’ laws.

Ron Paul: Voted against Gramm – Leach – Bliley, though he’s for a completely free market sans of even Glass – Steagall.

Rick Perry: Rick Perry has close ties to Phil Gramm, the Gramm in the Glass – Steagall repealing Gramm – Leach – Bliley Act. This, combined with Rick Perry’s statement to ‘Free up’ Wall Street probably means he’s against Glass – Steagall.

Buddy Roemer: Buddy Roemer would reinstate Glass – Steagall.

Mitt Romney: Mitt Romney would repeal Dodd – Frank. But let us not forget that Mitt Romney is the candidate who helped start Bain Capital.

And lastly

Rick Santorum: Rick Santorum voted in favor of Gramm – Leach – Bliley while in the Senate.

            There it is, all wrapped up. Now you know more about Glass - Steagall and even know a little bit more about the financial industry and crisis in this country. I hope that you are still open-minded about which candidate to support, regardless, and I hope that this helps you in your ultimate decision. Expect another piece soon.

- Joshua Fisher

@JAFThrasher
J.Fisher2028@yahoo.com
http://www.longhairedpoet.blogspot.com
http://www.facebook.com/alexander.thrasher



"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Conversation With Fred Karger: Web Extra - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

Conversation With Fred Karger: Web Extra - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Conversation With The Candidate: Fred Karger Part 2 - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

Conversation With The Candidate: Fred Karger Part 2 - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Conversation With The Candidate: Fred Karger - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

Conversation With The Candidate: Fred Karger - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Conversation With Buddy Roemer: Web Extra - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

Conversation With Buddy Roemer: Web Extra - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

- Joshua Fisher

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Conversation With Buddy Roemer: Part 2 - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

Conversation With Buddy Roemer: Part 2 - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

- Joshua Fisher

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Conversation With The Candidate: Buddy Roemer - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

I thought this might make a nice addendum to my post from earlier today. Two more to come from Roemer and three to come from Karger. Stay tuned!

Conversation With The Candidate: Buddy Roemer - Politics - Commitment 2012 - WMUR New Hampshire

- Joshua Fisher


"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Buddy Roemer - An Independent and Free Thinker in a World Bought and Sold by Corporatism?

    Buddy Roemer is running for the Republican Party Nomination for President in 2012. He was a four term congressman and a one term governor, both of the state of Louisiana. Not to dwell on the two party dichotomy, but I want to point out that he switched from Democrat to Republican. He did this in 1991, after fighting with Ronald Reagan in Congress. I think that this, combined with his support for the Occupy Wall Street Movement is a good sign of his independence. He is a free thinker and he's running his campaign with a $100 maximum donation, full disclosure process. He's not taking any PAC money, any Super PAC money, no lobbyist money and no corporate money.  He wants to serve the American people, not the multi - national corporations. This is something I appreciate. I'm a believer that there is a three pronged problem. You have the corporations, the politicians and the mainstream media. They are all interconnected. The corporations fund the politicians and the mainstream media. The politicians make it legal for the corporations to buy politicians and buy preferable legislation. Buddy Roemer wants to cut the ties between corporations and politicians. Repurifying one of those three prongs. I support him because of this stance, and because he believes in the OWS Movement. Buddy Roemer, who started his own successful bank that didn't take any bailout money, hasn't been allowed in a single debate. Does anyone else see an issue with this? I've wrote a lot lately about how important debate is to the American process. I love conversation and debate. Look in your local bookstore you can buy the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist Papers, both several hundred pages long, those were the debates this country is founded on. Now we have two hour debates that provide ten second soundbites, where the commercial break is as important as the dialogue, and not all the candidates can get a podium on the stage or a seat at the table!
     Buddy consistently points out, and validly, I believe, that he is the only candidate running now who has been a Congressman and a Governor. He has legislative and executive experience. Combine that with his successful small business experience, and I don't know why in this election season, focused on the economy and jobs, Governor Roemer cannot even get onto a debate! It's because the corporations he's fighting against own the mainstream media who host the debates he can't get into. They fund the polls he does poorly on. As long as you soley watch cable news, they control what you do and do not know. This is not right, and it is crippling not only the conversations in this country, but the honest campaigns of legitimate candidates like Buddy Roemer.

Now I'm going to publish a few videos here of the Governor and a link to his website, so you can kind of get a feel for what he's like.

Buddy Roemer's 2012 Campaign Website

A petition site to debate organizers and sponsors to let Buddy into the debates (I don't believe that it's part of the official campaign, however).

Buddy Roemer's CSPAN Webpage

A Link to Buddy Roemer's Jobs Speech

Buddy's Youtube Page

Now, the first video. It's a campaign video. Watch how he doesn't attack a single candidate:

Here is Buddy Roemer discussing Occupy Wall Street with Adam Green and Lawrence O' Donnell:



And I'll close with this campaign ad that I just love:



Anyway, that's my two sense on Buddy Roemer and the current system. I think the former Governor and former Congressman deserves a fair shake, and so I'm trying to offer it to him.
Food For Thought,

- Joshua A. Fisher



Contact Information:

Email: J.fisher2028@yahoo.com
Twitter: @JAFThrasher
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/alexander.thrasher

P.S. If you would like to have my blog updates sent directly to your inbox, feel free to email me your email address and request I add it to my mailing list.



"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

LetBuddyDebate.org - Let Buddy Roemer participate in the Republican presidential debates

This country was founded on ideas that were discussed and debated in an open forum. Buddy Roemer is a presidential candidate, and his exclusion from these debates is a disgrace to the America I've fallen in love with. So please follow the link below and sign the petition to include Buddy Roemer in the debates!

LetBuddyDebate.org - Let Buddy Roemer participate in the Republican presidential debates

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Chris Christie Endorses Mitt Romney

     Tim Pawlenty, Thaddeus McCotter and now Chris Christie. Mitt Romney is racking up big name endorsements from both former presidential contendors and former potential presidential contendors. But this may not be enough for Mitt Romney. Based on recent polls ( http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/111007/herman-cain-gains-20-point-lead-mitt-romney ) Herman Cain is actually beating Mitt Romney, and he doesn't even have any big name endorsements that I know of. The argument is, of course, that Mitt Romney has had a lot of staying power in first place, no matter how often second placers (T-Paw, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Ron Paul?) bit at his ankles, he stayed in first place, even if it wasn't by a comfortable margin. This is the first time I have seen Mitt Romney get surpassed in a poll (not to say this is the first time he's ever been surpassed in a poll).
     This is my first presidential race. I'm a political nerd, and I get very excited about these things. I'm also excited to see that all the money in the world and a pocket full of fancy endorsements may not be enough to win the nomination, if the previously mentioned poll is any indication.
     Maybe the people still have some power.

Hopefully,

Joshua A. Fisher

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

This Is What Is Wrong With The Mainstream Media

My Grandfather and I often like to discuss politics. I think he was inspired to send me the following link, after reading my 'Letter of Solidarity' the other day.

Here's the link. It's to an article in USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-10-10/whats-next-for-occupy-wall-street-protests/50724276/1

And after reading it, this was my response back to him:

Kousser says OWS eventually has to get political, and get partisan.

"This is how a movement grows up. It's not enough just to point out what's wrong. You need to affect the levers of power to change things. Politicians don't fear forces that can't change elections."

Eventually OWS has to get political, and get partisan??? Political, I can find acceptable, I do believe in the power of electoral politics, in statesmenship. But partisan? I do not like partisan politics, not one little bit! And I believe any Democrat that wishes to be a part of this movement needs to repent for the fact that they too have voted in favor of big banks and big businesses. The stimulus package was all about that, big banks and big businesses, not about the middle class or the 99%. What Kousser is suggesting in the second statement, especially when followed by the first, is that we cannot affect change in the electoral process without being partisan. I think that kind of mentality has brainwashed and stupified the American public.

The problem is two things. First, people believe that 'Partisan' means Democrat vs. Republican. They do not begin to fathom the Green Party or the Libertarian Party, let alone even smaller parties like the America First Party or the American Third Position Party. Every presidential cycle, hundreds of independents and write - ins run for office, and every time, because of the laws established by the corporate parties, they fight tooth and nail just to gain simple ballot access and because of the corporate bought mainstream media, they fight just for simple, basic news and media coverage.

What Mr. Kousser said, what USA Today published, it is exactly what is wrong with the Mainstream Media. It is exactly what is wrong with American politics, it is exactly what is wrong with the corporatist climate in this country and it is THE exact reason I personally want to be a part of this movement.

Many of the people who would be our leaders in this movement have had their chances, they don't deserve another. Who are we going to get to lead us? Former Senator and PAC runner Russ Feingold? MSM favorite and college professor Cornell West? Personally I don't think so. I'm ready to see many revolutions in this country. I hear every day about getting back to our Founding Fathers, well I believe our Founding Fathers truly believed that a farmer could be president. An every day worker could run for office and could win on the merit of what he was saying, not on the amount of money he accepted from big donors or the amount of time he got on FOX, MSNBC, ABC, CNN or CBS!

But, then again, what do I know. I'm simply a small part of that 99%, fed up with the current direction and climate of this country. I'm a single part of the middle class with political aspirations, but I don't want to be bought by AIG and stock market speculators. I want the American people to take off their Mainstream Media blinders and support a presidential candidate, not a party, and not a bank.

Thinking Out Loud,

Joshua Fisher

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

A Night with John Coltrane and Billie Holiday

Frigid
like a blizzard in the heart
and ice that traps the soul.
Cold.

Absolute gloom
like a night with no stars and no moon
and your worst nightmare.
Darkness.

Bare
like a room with no furniture
and a man with no clothes.
Empty.

Love,
your love - Frigid, Gloomy, Bare
Cold, Dark and Empty,
the love you have for me.

To you I whisper sweet nothings,
at night I hold you close to me,
you're in my dreams, at night and during the day.

I wake up and now your gone away,
I sit and wait all day,
I hope you'll call,
I guess the truth is, you have nothing to say.

I guess the nights we spent on the phone,
and the mornings we watched the sun rise together,
I guess the times I held your hand in mine,
were just fleeting moments of a teenage romance.

Now the warmth you put in my heart is extinguished,
the star in my eye has fallen from the sky -
I am now left void.

I do not blame you.
I swim before my food is digested,
I jump without a parachute,
I run without shoes
and make love without a condom.
I blame myself,
for missing you.

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

A Letter of Solidarity to Occupty Wall Street and Its Satellite Protests

     Money is a corrupting force and the people are corrupted. The Big Banks and the Big Businesses own the politicans. The politicians are bought and paid for at a price the working class cannot afford. Those same banks and businesses own the mainstream media. The mainstream media owns your local media. They control your information, they elect politicans by giving air - time to the one who wishes to capitulate, while allowing the opponents to grasp for air that is not there. Not only do we need to tell the Banksters to quit speculating with the money that sustains us, we need to tell the government to quit subsidizing big multi - national corporations and to quit giving them and the rich tax breaks. The rich need to pay their fair share of taxes, the big business and banks are not people. They should not own and control the media or the statespeople who are supposed to serve us and not the rich! I appreciate and stand with the people who can and do Occupy Wall Street, literally or figuratively. We are the people, this is our country, we need to take contral and stand up for it, for ourselves. Please! Stand with Occupy Wall Street! In spirit, Solidarity and fiscally or by writing about it and the issues it protest in your blog, or by speaking about in on your vlog. Open up the conversation! Speak up, speak out! Then don't be afraid to listen. They will use the media to divide and conquer us, but the 99% are not the enemies, and we should debate with them, but never fight against them because the 'them' of the 99% are us! The time is never tomorrow, it is always today, it is always now! Will you speak out and stand with the working class? I do.

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."

Off the Cuff Rant #1

     I have yet to, since starting this blog, do an off the cuff rant. Completely unedited, completely uncensored. The grammar promises to be less than perfect and the ideas may run or even be completely jumbled. But I want to go ahead and take all I know and/or think I know about the current presidential and political landscape and spew it out onto the keyboard for my readership to enjoy.
     So, I'll start with what everyone is paying attention to. The mainstream GOP field. The MSM, and therefore most of my audience are ignoring fringe, fourth tier candidates Buddy Roemer and Fred Karger, while Gary Johnson fights for recognition and attention, Jon Huntsman tries to convince people he's not a democrat in disguise, Mitt Romney leads, Cain and Gingrich move on up, Tim Pawlenty and Thaddeus McCotter join the Romney camp and Bachmann and Perry try to get back up to and stay in the top tier of candidates. But lets face it. One way or the other, all of these candidates, save for Buddy Roemer, either believe in capitulation to the big banks and big corporations, or they are direct slaves to them through the donations they have accepted. I do not know which is worse, Romney or Perry, at bluntly and openly being a bought and paid for politician. If you want more of the same. If you want the banks and the corporations to get all the money while the middle class sinks into the lower class and the poor get poorer, than elect any of nine of the ten candidates I mentioned up there, and the one I forgot, Santorum. Buddy Roemer, while being a pretty good conservative and Republican, has raised my eyebrow simply because he refuses to accept any more than $100 dollars in any single donation. He accepts no PAC money, no corporate money, no insurance money, nothing. His whole gimmick is 'Free to Lead.' And honestly? I'm buying. (Check it out: Freetolead.com)
     Of course, if the democratic candidates currently filed with the FEC don't get on a primary ballot with the president, I will take advantage of voting in the Republican Primary when it makes it's way to Georgia, all depending on who makes it to my lovely little state. If Perry makes it to my state, I will make it a point to vote against him, simply for the fact that he is an anti - seventeenth amendment elitist. Does he really want to give the power back to the state legislatures? Forgive me if I've said this before, but in my mind, if it comes to giving power to the federal or state government, give it to the state, but, if it comes to giving power to the state government or the people, GIVE IT TO THE PEOPLE!!!!
     And yes, I dabbled into studies of the federalist papers in high school, and I'm so glad that the federalist papers are not part of the law. I would say in the Federalist vs. Anti - Federalist dichotomy, I would be an Anti - Federalist every time. Maybe I lean a little to the side of intellectual Anarchist, here, but while the popular majority elected the state legislature, that does not mean that the popular majority will prefer whom the state legislature elects to serve us in the senate. By giving the people the power to directly elect their senators, it lessens the 'Pay to Play' atmosphere, which is already thick in American politics. (While I'm at it, I will point out that I'm for the direct election of the president, i.e. the abolishment of the Electoral College.)
     I am not ignorant to the counterarguments in favor of the electoral college and the state legislatures use in helping the masses elect Statespeople. The Federalist Papers argument, the one that still stands today, and has been reverberated by such personalities as John Stossel, says that the general populous may be too ignorant, short-sighted and too emotionally charged in order to vote for a proper "leader." Right of the bat i'd like to point out I thought they were elected servants, representatives, not leaders. State legislators, Congresspeople and Senators are not supposed to lead, but are supposed to understand what the people want, and simply enact it out. The only elected officials who have the excuse of calling themselves leaders are the onese elected to executive positions, as they often have to make very tough decisions. Though I don't know if there's a law that says they cannot release 'classified' information and open an American dialogue about it, I will concede that they probably don't have the time for that when it comes to most of the decisions they have to make. Still, with this concession, I would have to ponder how much a President could compromise between leader and servant, if said President was to put their mind to it.
     To change gears, I want to remind the electorate that registered with the FEC are 229 candidates for president. Fifth - Tier Republican candidates, Democrats people have never heard of before, Third partiers, fourth partiers, independents and no partiers. The only time when you have to forfiet your vote to a 'lesser of the two evils' is when you buy into the Mainstream Media, corporate bought and paid for scam that only Republicans or Democrats are electable. As for myself? I will vote for the candidate I think is best, come November 8th, 2012. I will hold my head up high knowing I did not vote for a candidate I despise just in attempts to stop a candidate I despise even more from winning. That is not the way our Representative Democracy, our Democratic Republic, our whatever you call it, is supposed to function.
     If I were to vote tomorrow, I'd vote for the Green Party Candidate Kent Mesplay. That is the honest truth. I would not vote for Obama, and even if Gary Johnson won the nomination, he has lost my vote, whatever it would have been worth to him.

Till next time,

Joshua Alexander Fisher

"Those that dream by night, in the dusty recesses of their mind, wake in the day to find that all was vanity, but the dreamers of the day, are dangerous men, for they may act out their dreams and make them real."