Regulatory reform debate obscures key fact: Everybody’s getting money from Wall Street

Photo of Jon Ward
Jon Ward
  • See All Articles
  • Send Email
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Bio

      Jon Ward

      Jon Ward covers the White House and national politics for The Daily Caller. He covered the last two years of George W. Bush's presidency and the first year of Barack Obama's presidency for The Washington Times. Prior to moving to national politics, Jon worked for the Times' city desk and bureaus in Virginia and Maryland, covering local news and politics, including the D.C. sniper shootings and subsequent trial, before moving to state politics in Maryland. He and his wife have two children and live on Capitol Hill. || <a href="mailto:jw@dailycaller.com">Email Jon</a>

In the often-confusing debate on financial regulatory reform, there are many assertions and accusations but few facts. Yet here are two: Washington is awash in Wall Street money, and both Republicans and Democrats are recipients.

Democrats have an edge when it comes to raising funds in lower Manhattan, and particularly from Goldman Sachs, the investment bank being sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The financial sector has given $11.1 million to the Democratic National Committee and its two congressional campaign committees so far this election cycle, compared to $7.3 million for Republicans, according to OpenSecrets.org. Goldman has given about 70 percent of its donations to Democrats this cycle and gave 75 percent of its $6 million in donations to Democrats in the 2008 election.

Republicans get their share, too, especially in the Senate where financial reform will be decided. Out of the $7.3 million given to the Republican campaign arms, the National Republican Senatorial Committee got $4.3 million.

The result is that both parties have flung accusations back and forth, some of them having merit and some of them not, even as they both have factions that are genuinely trying to pass a reform bill. But if Wall Street’s largesse to both of them is any indication, neither side will want to be too tough with the final regulatory reform proposal.

Republicans have labeled the bill written by Sen. Chris Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee from Connecticut, as a permanent bailout for big banks. And Rep. Brad Sherman, a Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee agreed with them Monday, saying that “the Dodd bill has unlimited executive bailout authority.”

Democrats have pointed to Wall Street lobbying against the Dodd bill as evidence that Republicans are trying to protect the wealthy and block reform. But Republicans and Wall Street, at least publicly, are opposed to different things.

Wall Street firms are up in arms over proposals to regulate the complicated but lucrative derivatives market, and they also dislike the “Volcker rule,” which would bar banks from proprietary trading to limit speculative practices.

Those are completely separate issues from the problems that the GOP is raising over a $50 billion fund to unwind failed firms and powers that would be awarded to the Treasury Department to give loan guarantees to institutions that are deemed to be “systemically significant.”

One Wall Street source said financial institutions are not focused on the bailout and “too big to fail” objections coming from the GOP.

“I don’t think anybody’s particularly worried about those [provisions],” the source, who is close to Goldman Sachs, told The Daily Caller.

This difference between GOP and Wall Street objections suggests that Democrats are politicizing the debate by conflating Republican opposition to one potential problem with Wall Street resistance to different parts of the reform proposal.

But Democrats told The Daily Caller Monday that the GOP is using the bailouts argument as a cover to hide their objections to derivatives regulation.

“There is a feeling that the Senate Republicans have one line of criticism they make in public, but that is only meant to create political space so they can insist on changes to other parts of the bill that are harder to turn into public causes,” said one senior Senate Democratic leadership aide.

Aides to the top Democratic leaders in the House and Senate confirmed this point of view, and the White House also lent some support to it. The president continued to talk Monday about Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s recent meeting with Wall Street executives in New York.

  • Pingback: Regulatory Reform Bill: Another Round of Bailouts * « Veritas Today

  • relayer10

    The fact of the matter is this. Just pay attention to what a politician actually does. What they say is simply not worth anything. Many have mentioned campaign reform- our current President pledged that he would take public money for his run, which would have meant less influence by outside parties. Instead, when he saw that his untraceable internet money machine would give him an extreme money advantage, he did exactly the opposite of his “pledge”. His actions proved that his word was worthless, and foretold what future behavior would be. Just look at who donates money and to whom. Most of that can be found, if you dig a bit. Then look only at what the politician actually does, or did…not what they said the would do, or said they did. Obama, Dodd, and Schumer were the largest recipients of Wall St and Banking money. Now they “say” they are anti Bank and anti Wall St. Yet the bill they are pushing is being endorsed by the Banking industry and Wall Street. Hmm….I wonder why? Could it be that the words do not match the actual deeds….yet again?

  • Pingback: links for 2010-04-20 « Overton’s Arrow

  • Pingback: Does laser eye surgery disqualify you from being a military pilot? | laser eye surgery

  • emem

    Start laying a trail of $20 bills down the capitol steps in any direction and it would be field of dreams – if you build it they will come – in droves, just like they show up for $5000 a plate dinners.

    “They” meaning any democrat or repulican.