A Very Corrupt Town

I sat down with Jake Blumgart of Campus Progress to talk about covering Washington DC. Here's a excerpt of our discussion of legislative battles over the future of the financial industry, which seems particularly germane in light of today's White House announcement of its new regulatory initiative:

It does seem to be harder to rally people around something like temporarily nationalizing the banks. Massive pro-gay rights demonstrations, for example, are couched in terms of human rights, which everyone gets. But banking…

That is why they win these battles. There is no mass constituency for re-regulating the banks. It doesn't get people in the [thumps finger on chest]. There are certain political arguments that make your cheeks warm. Those are the things that win elections. It is hard to marshal intensity around systemic risk regulations or temporarily nationalizing the banks. So without a mass constituency it is left to insiders in D.C. That battle isn't even between David and Goliath. It is between Goliath and David's poodle's infant puppy.

Comments (21)

1. Or is it even POSSIBLE Mr Hayes...that almost nobody supports the idea? And that most think at SOME point in our past few centuries of existance...we did just fine without nationalizing the banks, even if one accepts doing that as "a good thing"?

   I mean, couldn't you say "There is no mass constituency for OUTLAWING NOSE PICKING. It doesn't get people in the [thumps finger on chest]. There are certain political arguments that make your cheeks warm. Those are the things that win elections. It is hard to marshal intensity around ending disgusting digit-nasal probing. So without a mass constituency it is left to insiders in D.C."

   Posted by Mask at 06/17/2009 @ 3:16pm

2. So without a mass constituency it is left to insiders in D.C. That battle isn't even between David and Goliath. It is between Goliath and David's poodle's infant puppy.

   That's even an understatement when one considers the lobby cartel and politicians banking industry has in their hip pockets. Even if the people of the country were backing it all the way, it would still be very difficult to impossible to pull off.

   Look at the Health Industry fiasco. Most Americans want some sort of universal coverage and yet here we are with nothing moving forward and good Old Max Baucus sitting on his ass holding things up pretending that he's Mr bipartisan. He's Mr. I'm bought off by the insuarnce lobby groups.

   The banking cartel compared to the working Americans is more like Goliath versus the smallest flea on David's poodle's infant puppy.

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 06/17/2009 @ 3:19pm

3. It still appears to me like very few of you can even define the actual role of the Federal Reserve.

   Government pursuing banking reform? Really? The idea of "nationalizing" banking?

   The Federal Reserve is a Banking Cartel folks. Wake the f**k up already!

   Christopher Hayes, you're smarter than this. Do you ever talk with Greider about the Fed? Don't you know the Nation Magazine was one of the very few voices to speak out against the Federal Reserve Act in 1913? Don't you see what the Fed is?

   This is not some wacko conspiracy theory. It is just the system as it is. The american taxpayer serves the banks, not the other way around. Surely that can't be news to you.

   Posted by freiheit1 at 06/17/2009 @ 5:38pm

4. i don't see what the problem is.

   everybody knows that the CRFP will now perform the regulatory functions of the BRAX except in the instances where institutions fall under the guidance of the TRUP, having itself combined 3/4 of the role previously held by 4/5 of the DRIT and TRID agencies.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/17/2009 @ 9:57pm

5. we need an anagram czar.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/17/2009 @ 9:58pm

6. damn.

   acronym czar.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/17/2009 @ 10:00pm

7. Federal Agency for Regulating the Treasury....F.A.R.T

   Posted by koroviev at 06/17/2009 @ 10:44pm

8. "There is no mass constituency for OUTLAWING NOSE PICKING.

   Posted by Mask at 06/17/2009 @ 3:16pm

   If there was and they proposed a law, George W. Bush would have vetoed it... He was an avid public nosepicker. (See footage of him on Youtube furiously picking his nose at a Rangers game.)

   Posted by koroviev at 06/17/2009 @ 11:19pm

9. Federal Liability Assurance Tribunal to Unify Legal Endeavours for Necessary Capital Emissions...

   FLATULENCE

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/17/2009 @ 11:37pm

10. Association for Selectively Subsidizing Heavily Overvalued Leveraged Equitable Securities....

    Posted by koroviev at 06/18/2009 @ 12:35am

11. It's not corruption, it's "free speech" . Ask the neo cons, they'll tell ya.

    Unless the banking money comes from a union pension fund, then it's corruption.

    Posted by crabwalk at 06/18/2009 @ 06:23am

12. o.k., kor..

    you got me (well, not "me") there.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/18/2009 @ 07:39am

13. mornin', crab:

    http://tinyurl.com/brainiacs-unite

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/18/2009 @ 07:43am

14. This is not some wacko conspiracy theory. ----Posted by freiheit1 at 06/17/2009 @ 5:38pm

    No, but it does seem to APPEAL to wacko conspiracists...i.e. James von Brunn.

    Posted by Mask at 06/18/2009 @ 08:06am

15. Subsidizing Congressional "Right-offs" (give me some lattitude here, I know it's write-offs) for Endless War Uses. SCREW U

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 06/18/2009 @ 11:27am

16. Committee for Heuristic Education and Research of Monetary Appropriation Kerfuffles.

    Posted by ficheye at 06/18/2009 @ 1:05pm

17. Posted by ficheye at 06/18/2009 @ 1:05pm |

    That would be the Special Joint Committee for Heuristic Education and Research of Monetary Appropriation Kerfuffles.

    Posted by Mask at 06/18/2009 @ 1:22pm

18. Future post by sjchermak: "I don't see what's funny about that"

    :)

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 06/18/2009 @ 2:03pm

19. Posted by BlackFrancis at 06/18/2009 @ 2:03pm

    Nawwww...I think he can figure out basic acronyms.

    "EIB"="Excellance In Broadcasting"...etc.

    Posted by Mask at 06/18/2009 @ 2:50pm

20. :) if it has a far right slant and isn't too long he can handle it...

    Posted by BlackFrancis at 06/18/2009 @ 3:23pm

21. Really Useless Sh-t Heap?

    Obstinate Rude Evil Ignorant Livid Lame Yeller?

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/18/2009 @ 7:24pm

    Excellent!

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 06/19/2009 @ 08:30am