Two senators know they’ll have to fight big banks to achieve passage of a bill to protect taxpayers from future bailouts.
"A little over a month ago, the Senate held a nonbinding vote on the problems posed by megabanks. Its members voted 99 to 0 to “to end ‘too big to fail’ subsidies or funding advantage for Wall Street megabanks.”
Brown-Vitter would achieve those goals while also protecting taxpayers. As such, it will be interesting to see which senators retreat from their earlier positions by refusing to support the bill. Constituents on the alert for hypocrisy, take note." - Gretchen Morgenson, NY Times
For a different take on Brown-Vitter there's this:
"Even so, the bill will of course face enormous resistance, and not just from the bank lobbyists who seem reflexively to oppose any measure to overhaul their industry. There are analysts who want to do more to rein in the banks, but who think the senators are naïve, or intellectually lacking, to think that today’s complex financial system can be made safer with their seemingly simple fixes. They have a point." - Peter Eavis, NY Times DealBook
I tend to think it's time to give the "naive" approach a try. The banking industry has proven that they cannot self-regulate and they cannot be trusted. Ratings agencies may as well be on banking payrolls. The status quo is what got us into the mess, and from what I've read about Basel III and even Dodd-Frank, they still feel a little too much like having the foxes guarding us ordinary citizens trapped in our financial henhouses.