I was really disappointed to hear that Senator Dodd was quoted in the Hill newspaper taking potshots at Liz Warren's viability as a candidate for the new consumer protection agency that (despite having its power chipped away during a year of legislative back and forth) could do some actual good in regulating the mega-sleazy big banks that caused the financial meltdown. As noted by Dave Sirota:
Over the last few days, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner have made the case that Harvard professor and Congressional Oversight Panel chairwoman Elizabeth Warren is essentially too controversial (potentially not "confirmable," in Dodd-speak) a figure to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). This, then, raises the revealing question of how Washington defines "controversial?"
Recall that the charge of "too controversial" was not made by Senate Democrats (or at least not at the volume they are being made against Warren) against Gary Gensler, the former Goldman Sachs executive appointed by President Obama to head the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. It was not made by most Senate Democrats against Larry Summers, a hedge fund executive subsequently appointed to a top economic position in the administration. It was not made against Citigroup executive Jack Lew when last week he was appointed to head the Office of Management and Budget. And it wasn't made against Tim Geithner, who orchestrated massive taxpayer giveaways to major banks during his time at the New York Fed.
This is unfortunately a typical beltway chess move. If there's someone you (or your friends / donors / firms you may want to work for after retirement) don't like up for an appointment, without providing specific character or professional criticisms, you just go to some reporter and make vague, subjective pronouncements that the candidate in question may not be the most popular choice, or might not have the best chance at confirmation. The strategy is to push that person down the list and bring another, more favorable candidate to the top.
Liz Warren is the exact opposite of the Wall Street/DC insider like Tim Geithner and Larry Summers who make the revolving door between the corporate traders' office and the lobbyist and Hill staff offices spin faster than a roulette wheel. As an academic she's studied the effects of economic changes on real families. She knows what fixes to make to cut down on risky profit taking behavior that leads to things like the housing bubble. And better yet, she has the ability to explain in layman's terms why this risky behavior is bad for the whole country, and even bad for capitalism. Liz Warren does not deserve to be torpedoed like this, and if it's true the votes aren't there for a real friend of the consumers (and taxpayers!) then let's find out which Senators are on board and which are not (I'm looking at you, Schumer!). Voters will be interested to know what Senators' views are.
Today I got an email from Working Families, and what do you know they are asking for input to give to Dodd. Here's my two cents I put in the email form:
Senator Dodd - Liz Warren would be an outstanding advocate for us "real americans" back in Connecticut whose taxes have been used to bail out Wall Street's reckless behavior. She deserves a fair and open hearing, and if Republicans (or any Democrats for that matter) want to side with Wall Street and vote against a strong consumer advocate who knows how to reform the system to put long term American prosperity before short term profit taking, let those Senators put their vote on the record. I am very disappointed that you chose to go to the media and take potshots at her viability. This torpedoing is the kind of crass, inside-the-beltway politics that make voters cynical about Washington. Put your fellow senators on the record and stop playing games. I expect someone of your stature and experience to stand up and do the right thing.
You can sign the petition here, and be sure to let Dodd know consumers and taxpayers are paying attention!
Nine health care reform activists were arrested this morning while staging a sit-in inside Senator Joseph Lieberman's congressional office in Washington, D.C.
The activists were there representing an organization called Mobilization for Health Care For All.
Explaining their reasons for their actions, student activist Jason Ortiz said, "we staged a sit-in at Senator Lieberman's office this morning in order to ask him to return the $65,000 campaign donation that he recently received from the Aetna health insurance corporation and to ask him to represent the people of Connecticut, not the insurance companies."
The group was also there to protest Senator Lieberman's announcement last week that he will filibuster any health reform bill in the Senate that contains a public option.
In total there were 9 arrests made at approximately 10:15 a.m. EST, Thursday, November 5.
At 9:15 this morning the group requested a meeting with the Senator and refused to leave until they were given a chance to meet with him. They were told by Senator Lieberman's staff that they would not be given a meeting with the Senator, and that if they did not leave they would be arrested. Senator Lieberman's staff subsequently contacted law enforcement, and 9 activists were physically removed from the building and arrested.
Some members of the group went to a meeting of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (which Senator Lieberman chairs) to stage a protest in the presence of Senator Lieberman. They were asked to leave and did so without incident.
Of those arrested, one, Brittney Florio, is currently a University of Connecticut student, and one, John Mohrbacher, is an alumnus.
For more information, please call Jason Ortiz at (860)639-8101
MLN is powered by