- Al Gore’s climate-changers at EPA hearings foiled by cool temperatures
- Army’s 3-D printed bombs will create ‘a whole new universe’ of deadly capabilities
- Hamas calls on Hezbollah to join in fight against Israel
- Senators to FIFA, others: Don’t reward Putin with the World Cup in 2018
- U.S. condemns Israeli shelling of shelter in Gaza
- Obamacare shoots premiums up by 88 percent in California
- Chicken pox outbreak puts illegal immigrant facility on lockdown
- Obama to Republicans: ‘Stop just hatin’ all the time’
- U.S. chemical sites vulnerable despite millions spent on security: Congress
- Driverless cars to hit the British streets by 2015
Democrats scramble to save reform package
Critics: Bill would not have stopped crisis
Question of the Day
Despite their efforts, the only provision in the Senate bill that would have forced big banks to divest some of the riskiest derivative securities operations was narrowed considerably in conference, leading many analysts to conclude that Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs will be able to continue many of their current activities or only gradually phase them out.
“The reforms will work to clamp down some excessive risk-taking. But if history is any guide, Wall Street will over time find new ways to maximize profits by seeking out loopholes and finding ways to cleverly circumvent some of the new rules,” said Bernard Baumohl, analyst at the Economic Outlook Group.
“After all, what followed the repeal of Glass-Steagall was an ongoing cat-and-mouse game among financial firms, regulators and legislators. It may sound cynical, but we suspect that game will start anew.”
While new regulation was necessary to reduce risks, Mr. Baumohl said, the tangle of new mandates on banks and uncertainties created by the lengthy regulatory process ahead will cause banks to remain overly cautious about lending, making it harder for the economy to recover.
“The more immediate threat to the economy is that banks are still too risk-averse and are keeping their lending windows shut,” he said. “The pendulum of risk-taking by lenders has swung to the side of excessive caution.”
Banking groups have been warning that elements of the bill aimed at making credit available on fairer and clearer terms — including bans on various kinds of credit fees — are too punitive and restrictive and end up making credit less available to consumers and small businesses.
But the bill’s advocates say the costs are worth the benefits of having a fairer and safer financial system.
“It is worth giving up a modest amount of economic growth in the good years to avoid the terrible downturns like the one we just experienced,” said Douglas Elliott, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. “The bill will not eliminate financial crises, but it will make them less frequent and considerably milder, which is all we can realistically accomplish.”
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
- U.S. economy roars back in spring quarter
- Energy Department eyes regional gas reserves for emergency use
- Economists see signs of another market bubble
- Crude oil will head north of the border to Canada
- S&P: Boeing to suffer if Ex-Im Bank killed
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
- Geraldo Rivera: Matt Drudge 'doing his best to stir up a civil war'
- Lois Lerner hated conservatives, new emails show
- Catholic League slams Obama: 'Do Christian lives mean so little to you?'
- HURT: Impeaching Obama is a losing strategy for the GOP
- CARSON: Rudderless U.S. foreign policy
- Patent workers paid to exercise, shop, do chores: report
- Federal judge grants 90-day stay in D.C. gun case
- Fla. mom arrested for allowing 7-year-old son to walk to park alone
- Senate overcomes first filibuster of Obama's border-spending bill
- Obama thanks Muslims for 'building the very fabric of our nation'
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world