Congresswoman Maloney and the JEC Show Hints of Muscle

Congresswoman Maloney and the JEC Show Hints of Muscle

Congresswoman Maloney and the JEC Show Hints of Muscle

Yesterday’s hearing at the Joint Economic Committee, convened by Congresswoman Maloney, gave me some hope that Congress might be thinking about taking some leadership in systematically restructuring our financial system. I highly recommend that everyone watch the video.

Sam Brownback, Republican Congressman Burgess, Democratic Congressman Cummings, Democratic Congresswoman Maloney–unlikely bedfellows, to say the least–all appeared to accept the arguments of Joseph Stiglitz, Simon Johnson, and Thomas Hoenig, that the current PPIP and TARP projects are not just foolish but dangerous, and that we need a radical restructuring of the response to the crisis.

The panel starts with discussions of economic failure, but ends with the problems of political failure. As Congressman Burgess said in the opening remarks, "Trillions of taxpayer dollars are at risk, but congressional approval is not needed for the plan to proceed …on its face this is a violation of the democratic process."

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Yesterday’s hearing at the Joint Economic Committee, convened by Congresswoman Maloney, gave me some hope that Congress might be thinking about taking some leadership in systematically restructuring our financial system. I highly recommend that everyone watch the video.

Sam Brownback, Republican Congressman Burgess, Democratic Congressman Cummings, Democratic Congresswoman Maloney–unlikely bedfellows, to say the least–all appeared to accept the arguments of Joseph Stiglitz, Simon Johnson, and Thomas Hoenig, that the current PPIP and TARP projects are not just foolish but dangerous, and that we need a radical restructuring of the response to the crisis.

The panel starts with discussions of economic failure, but ends with the problems of political failure. As Congressman Burgess said in the opening remarks, "Trillions of taxpayer dollars are at risk, but congressional approval is not needed for the plan to proceed …on its face this is a violation of the democratic process."

Stiglitz described how "the big banks … tried to shape the view that there is no alternative than throwing [them] massive amounts of money." But he–and Johnson–also talked about how the revolving door between wall street and government is a real problem because of mindset, not just greed. If someone has "grown up" in the culture of big banks, he said, "they see things in this very peculiar way … we’ve seen some outstanding examples of that" in this crisis. "We’ve seen all our regulators get captured," said Johnson.

The hearing is intelligent, thoughtful, and shows some signs of life in our most representative branch, suggesting that Congress–chaotic, strange, over-gerrymandered, but still set up to be responsive to popular sentiment–might actually take some leadership in reform.

Congresswoman Maloney, in particular, asked repeated questions not just about what should be done, but how–you could watch her thinking about how Congress could take leadership.

Notably, every single member of the panel advocated regulations that would lead to encouraging small and medium sized banks, a more diverse and truly competitive system. As Johnson said, we have to break up the banks–both for our economic future, and to constrain the chances for regulatory capture in the future.

A hearing is not action, and the actions to date have been trivial. But with pressure, we could see Congress taking responsibility for economic policy; as Elizabeth Warren said the other day, we need people involved for our policy to improve.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x