Jim Himes Does It Again

Chris Murphy also (0.00 / 0)

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/200...

---

by: Scarce @ Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 17:16:41 PM UTC

Both of them? Why? (0.00 / 0)

What was the motivation?  What was it for Murphy?  I don't get it.

---

by: thomashooker @ Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 19:32:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What's the story? (0.00 / 0)

Why?  

---

by: thomashooker @ Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 18:02:24 PM UTC

MOTU (0.00 / 0)

.
Himes, at least, curious about Murphy tho.
.

"If those in charge of our society...can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves." ~~Howard Zinn

---

by: lakezoarian @ Mon Dec 07, 2009 at 14:13:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Permanent Estate Tax Relief (4.00 / 1)

 The higher the tax exemptions  the better the chances that America becomes a country  with a permanent aristocracy instead of a meritocracy.

---

by: BruceRubenstein2 @ Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 18:07:04 PM UTC

This is not a surprise. (4.00 / 1)

But it is a shame!

---

by: Ann Galloway @ Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 18:28:50 PM UTC

Agreed (4.00 / 1)

No surprise at all. The man represents the Gold Coast! Considering the amount of multi-millionaires calling Fairfield & Litchfield Counties home, these guys are technically doing their job to abolish their constituents' "death taxes."

---

by: ChanceKell @ Sat Dec 05, 2009 at 16:47:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In this state, the shame is that (0.00 / 0)

no matter what the issue, money talks.  We've got no Bernie Sanders.  The only one who comes close is Nader, and he's become a self-important nutjob.

We've got Hartford, the poorest city in the country, and Fairfield and Litchfield Counties. And too many of the people in between think Ron Paul is the answer.

It's too nice outside to be so cranky...I'm going out for a walk.

---

by: jeffs @ Sun Dec 06, 2009 at 13:59:11 PM UTC

He is doing something with regulatory reform (0.00 / 0)

http://www.connpost.com/ci_139...

Himes' solution is a new safety valve -- a so-called "contingent capital" fund -- that is designed to help recapitalize struggling financial firms before they get to the brink of bankruptcy and need to be dissolved with money from the industry-financed resolution fund.

Himes worked with Reps. Bill Foster, D-Ill., and Walt Minnick, D-Idaho on the contingent capital plan, which would allow the Federal Reserve to require certain financial firms to issue debt securities that could be converted to common equity in the company if federal regulators say the company is failing. If a company is found to be failing, those bond-holders would effectively take ownership of the firm.

---

by: Sue @ Sun Dec 06, 2009 at 15:56:54 PM UTC

I've been puzzling about this (0.00 / 0)

ever since I read it.

Here's what I get out of it:

"Hi - my company, Big Bucks Investments, would like to borrow some money from you. But the Federal Reserve says we might fail, so I need you to agree that your debt won't be secured, but will turn into ownership of Big Bucks Investment if we do come close to failing. So how much will you lend me on those terms?

Yeah, right.

---

by: Jon Kantrowitz @ Mon Dec 07, 2009 at 14:02:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is all politics (4.00 / 1)

I suspect that Himes and Murphy both think that this was a reasonable deal (45% after 3.5/7), but that both realized it would pass with our without their vote, so why not vote against it, duck the "Incumbent X voted for higher death taxes" 30-second spot, and avoid a little heat on the campaign trail?

Only way to stop votes like this one from happening in the future are to give Messrs. Himes and Murphy reason to believe that such votes will make for some headaches on the campaign trail, but from their left.  

---

by: OGDem @ Wed Dec 09, 2009 at 20:48:52 PM UTC

Actually its only 18% after $3.5/$7 million (0.00 / 0)

The 45% rate only kicks in on much higher estates.

---

by: Jon Kantrowitz @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 16:10:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]