FRONT PAGE    SPORTS BOARD  Hop To Forum Categories  Political Discussion    McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

Moderators: Admin, Chicopee John
Go
New
Find
Tools
Reply
  
-star Rating Rate It!  Login/Join 
Hall of Famer
Posted
Not good news for the McCain campaign:
quote:
McCain economic policy shaped by lobbyist
Swiss bank paid McCain co-chair to push agenda on U.S. mortgage crisis

By Jonathan Larsen, producer,
with Keith Olbermann
MSNBC
updated 8:52 p.m. ET, Tues., May. 27, 2008

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain’s national campaign general co-chair was being paid by a Swiss bank to lobby Congress about the U.S. mortgage crisis at the same time he was advising McCain about his economic policy, federal records show.

“Countdown with Keith Olbermann” reported Tuesday night that lobbying disclosure forms, filed by the giant Swiss bank UBS, list McCain’s campaign co-chair, former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, as a lobbyist dealing specifically with legislation regarding the mortgage crisis as recently as Dec. 31, 2007.

Gramm joined the bank in 2002 and had registered as a lobbyist by 2004. UBS filed paperwork deregistering Gramm on April 18 of this year. Gramm continues to serve as a UBS vice chairman.

News of Gramm’s involvement as a paid advocate for the banking industry, simultaneous with his unpaid work on McCain’s economic policies, comes as McCain’s campaign continues to reel from the purge of four other lobbyists. Two weeks ago, McCain banned lobbyists from advising him on the same subjects covered by their lobbying work.

As early as October, 2006, RealClearPolitics.com reported that Gramm was advising McCain on economic issues. Politico.com quoted McCain advisors saying that Gramm had input on McCain’s March 26 policy speech about the mortgage crisis. McCain himself has often cited Gramm’s influence as a way to establish his bona fides with economic conservatives.

When Gramm chaired the Senate Banking Committee, he wrote and passed deregulatory legislation in more than one industry, establishing himself as a pre-eminent foe of government regulation. McCain’s March 26 speech recommended further deregulation of the banking industry as his response to the mortgage crisis.

McCain and Gramm have been friends for more than a decade. McCain chaired Gramm’s 1996 presidential run and Gramm says the two men speak every day. McCain reportedly has hinted Gramm might serve as his Treasury secretary.

Last summer, Gramm was widely credited with saving McCain’s presidential campaign.

But even before lobbying emerged as an issue, some of his own advisors told the Washington Post last month that they questioned how Gramm’s legislative record might affect McCain’s campaign.

After Gramm passed a law easing regulation of energy-commodity trading, California experienced a sharp run-up in energy costs. The energy-trading company Enron was blamed and soon collapsed.

In 1999, Gramm successfully undid the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act, removing the decades-old wall between commercial banking, which was heavily regulated, and investment banking, which was not. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act did not extend significant new regulation to investment banking.

McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said that Gramm is "not benefitting from John McCain's plan." He also said that McCain preferred to focus on homeowners "truly in need" and opposed bailouts for affected banks, an aspect of the crisis that was not addressed in "Countdown"'s report.

Some economists fault Gramm’s deregulatory successes, as well as lax enforcement of remaining oversight powers, not just for the subprime mortgage crisis, but for its spread to other sectors of finance. Even Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has expressed interest in toughening regulations.

Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute told the Washington Post, “McCain is counting on people having very short memories and not connecting some pretty obvious dots here.”

The final UBS form listing Gramm’s work as a lobbyist says he was lobbying the Senate in the second half of 2007 regarding the Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act. The bill would have let bankruptcy judges rewrite mortgage terms for Americans facing foreclosure so they could repay their loans and keep their homes.

The banking industry opposed this measure. The bill failed.

On how this will play out, I can't say it better than Josh Marshall already has:
quote:
Many of the lobbying connections the press has dug up on McCain have been embarrassing. But I'm not sure any have really had teeth until this one. After all, how much does the average voter care that Charlie Black represented a lot of foreign dictators? A stench, yes? But finding out that McCain had a major subprime lender bank lobbyist whispering in his ear when McCain told the public that it was basically tough luck if they lost their houses?
 
Posts: 1811 | Registered: Tue January 29 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Fame Legend
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Many of the lobbying connections the press has dug up on McCain have been embarrassing. But I'm not sure any have really had teeth until this one. After all, how much does the average voter care that Charlie Black represented a lot of foreign dictators? A stench, yes? But finding out that McCain had a major subprime lender bank lobbyist whispering in his ear when McCain told the public that it was basically tough luck if they lost their houses?
Maybe this is just my partisan view here, but is there anyone that really questions what Phil Gramm's views on the mortgage situation would be with or without UBS? McCain's speeches have been right out of Gramm's well-worn playbook.

As for the comment "But finding out that McCain had a major subprime lender bank lobbyist whispering in his ear when McCain told the public that it was basically tough luck if they lost their houses?":

Didnt the article just say that the last bill Gramm lobbied for was OPPOSED by the banking industry and was designed to help people stay in their homes? Help me understand how that type of lobbying would push Gramm to tell "the public that it was basically tough luck if they lost their houses". Seems backwards to me.
 
Posts: 3021 | Registered: Tue March 21 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Fame Legend
Posted Hide Post
Of course, it is also worth pointing out that this is just another result of McCain's overzealous view on lobbyists. They arent all big evil monsters out to screw the American people. He and Obama would both do well to remember that before Olberman and OReilly discover that half the workers for each campaign are just lobbysists in sheep's clothing.
 
Posts: 3021 | Registered: Tue March 21 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Posted Hide Post
The article is strangely worded ("he was lobbying the Senate in the second half of 2007 regarding..."), but the transcript from Olbermann's show is much clearer:
quote:
At the same time he was giving that advice, federal disclosure forms reviewed by Countdown show that Gramm was simultaneously being paid by UBS to lobby the U-S Senate about the mortgage crisis… opposing government regulation… helping to kill a 2006 anti-predatory lending bill that would have tightened consumer protections, and might have mitigated the current crisis…

As recently as Dec. 31st of last year, still working for Swiss bankers specifically to help kill the “Emergency Home Ownership and Mortgage Equity Protection Act” and the “Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act,” a bill that would have let bankruptcy judges adjust mortgage terms so American families facing foreclosure could repay their loans, and keep their homes.
 
Posts: 1811 | Registered: Tue January 29 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Fame Legend
Posted Hide Post
Than this is where McCain's anti-lobbyist zeal comes back to bite him. No one doubts whether or not Gramm wouldve opposed those bills with or without UBS, but the fact that the was paid to actively voice his opinion in Washington now makes him a problem. Brilliant.
 
Posts: 3021 | Registered: Tue March 21 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Skipper of the Lake Erie Booze Patrol
Numbers Retired and hangs in the rafters
Picture of Westside Steve
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by We need Tom Tupa:
Than this is where McCain's anti-lobbyist zeal comes back to bite him. No one doubts whether or not Gramm wouldve opposed those bills with or without UBS, but the fact that the was paid to actively voice his opinion in Washington now makes him a problem. Brilliant.


Nothing inherently evil about lobbyists.
Just stupid phony populism.
WSS
 
Posts: 5307 | Location: Norton Ohio USA | Registered: Mon September 15 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of sevknowsbetter
Posted Hide Post
Westside you and Tupa are right there is nothing "evil" about lobbyist.

Self serving interest that does not reflect the populace interests is probably more accurate.

In a pay to play system that is our republic they are able to wield an unfair advantage that individual citizens can not have access too.

That is the problem and that is not evil it is just imbalanced against the population as a whole.

These advisors that all of the candidates use who have lobbying backgrounds are intelligent, accomplished individuals. The problem with this last flap with Mccain is that they are beholden FIRST to what JOB has been paying their bills and will continue to. They are not impartial experts, they basically are "ringers" for the special interest they represented in the possible future of these candidates.
 
Posts: 1703 | Registered: Mon October 08 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Fame Legend
Posted Hide Post
quote:
The problem with this last flap with Mccain is that they are beholden FIRST to what JOB has been paying their bills and will continue to. They are not impartial experts, they basically are "ringers" for the special interest they represented in the possible future of these candidates.
Yes or No: Do you think Phil Gramm proposes deregulation of banking and government restraint in response to the mortgage "crisis" because he had a job as a lobbyist?
 
Posts: 3021 | Registered: Tue March 21 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of sevknowsbetter
Posted Hide Post
I cant answer that with just a yes or no Tupa.

Do I think he was influenced from his lobbying career? yes I just dont know how much and that is the crux of the problem. Was it a minor or major part? that is something that is not easily gauged and therefore he should not be in the position that might be seen as a conflict of interest especially when it is as influential as his is.

On how Mccain is proposing to handle the mortgage fallout issue I am actually in favor of his position and Gramm's. I have been in those fields for some time and believe that we should not just bail out every borrower or bank who made silly risk decisions. I dont think that more federal regulation will neccessarily be more competent than market driven responses that the industry will correct itself.
 
Posts: 1703 | Registered: Mon October 08 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Numbers Retired and hangs in the rafters
Posted Hide Post
Tupa's got this one right, me thinks. You can't make a name for yourself trying to - rightly, in my view - address, as Sev notes, the influence of lobbyists and moneyed interests on the political process, and then turn around and staff virtually your entire campaign with people from the lobbying industry.

This is a problem of his own making.
 
Posts: 7602 | Registered: Wed September 28 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of sevknowsbetter
Posted Hide Post
heck and tupa you two are intelligent and know that Mccain has basically "sold his soul" because he knows this is his last chance to become president. He has made concessions in order to align himself with the financial powers that hold the reigns of the GOP.

I really liked and admired Mccain, I am still asking myself IF he got into office who would he REALLY be? The Maverick anti special interest/lobbyist, honest bipartisan moderate or the guy that has to swallow some of his positions to make his final run at the presidency?
 
Posts: 1703 | Registered: Mon October 08 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Numbers Retired and hangs in the rafters
Posted Hide Post
In his defense, running for president and running for Senator are two totally different things. The coalition has to be much larger. And McCain is in a no-win situation, stuck between the base, which doesn't love him, and the independents, who are falling out of love with him because of his dalliances with nuts like Hagee, Falwell, etc.

Unless events change the landscape, or somehow he coaxes Powell on to a ticket (which is a real long shot, I'd think) I really think McCain is going to get beat pretty handily. It's just not the year for a Republican president.
 
Posts: 7602 | Registered: Wed September 28 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community  
 

FRONT PAGE    SPORTS BOARD  Hop To Forum Categories  Political Discussion    McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

Designed by: CreAtens