Prediction: CitiGroup Will Finance Pat Toomey's Reelection Bid-- But Not Elizabeth Warren's

When Ronald Reagan hustled off to Washington in 1975 to declare that he was challenging Jerry Ford's reelection bid-- Ford eventually won the Republican Party convention battle on the first ballot-- he made a typically nice-sounding but superficial speech. "Our nation's capital has become the seat of a 'buddy' system that functions for its own benefit-- increasingly insensitive to the needs of the American worker who supports it with his taxes. Today it is difficult to find leaders who are independent of the forces that have brought us our problem... If America is to survive and go forward, this must change. It will only change when the American people vote for a leadership that listens to them, relies on them and seeks to return government to them."

Who could argue with that? And who wants anything to do with that damn buddy system serving special interests? Mike Lee, a radical right extremist from Utah claims to be a Reagan-Republican. Yesterday he analyzed the Cromnibus situation for his constituents back home. "Most Americans," he wrote, "would be shocked and appalled by what is going on in Washington right now." Sounds about right. And then he wandered off into right-wing neverneverland.

With a new Republican majority set to take control of the Senate, Harry Reid and his Democrat allies are doing all they can to cram through secret provisions before the end of the year that will reward their special-interest friends. All at taxpayer expense.

The so-called "omnibus" was cobbled together in back rooms out of sight of the American people. Members of the House and Senate have had very little time to read, decipher and decode its 1600 pages of spending increases, bad policy, and cronyist giveaways. The House has had just hours to review it before being forced to vote on this $1.1 trillion legislation.

This is not the way Congress is supposed to represent the American people. The country deserves better than to pass another monument to Washington dysfunction.

I need your help to spread the word to patriots like you across the country. Your support of $50, $100, $250, or your most generous contribution will allow those of us who are willing to do the right thing to show strength as we take the fight to the status quo.

We are going to demand that policies receive full and open debate. We will force the new majority to allow amendments, so we can improve reforms that work for the middle class and improve economic mobility among the poor.

And we will guarantee that any major legislation will have plenty of time for debate, so that members can do their job of informing and educating the public about what is going on in Washington.

No more back rooms. No more arbitrary deadlines. No more all-or-nothing spending bills.

And yet, and yet... Lee very much wants to deregulate the banksters and allow them to prey on whoever is unfortunate enough to fall under their awesome power. Like his right-wing ally from Pennsylvania, Wall Street whore Pat Toomey, Lee isn't backing Reagan's plea to end the buddy system or Elizabeth Warren's hard-nosed attempt to stop the special interest back-scratching that is the hallmark of this Cromnibus. Toomey, who has only be in the Senate for less than 4 years has already taken a handsome $4,865,798 in legalistic bribes from the Financial Sector. He guards their special interests like a mother hen; they're his buddies. He went onto a vicious rampage against Elizabeth Warren on Pennsylvania radio station WPHT yesterday. “I hope," he demanded, "you’re not going to fall for Elizabeth Warren’s nonsense."

The Pennsylvania Republican suggested Warren’s outrage came out of personal ambition, calling it “absolute nonsense.”

“This is Elizabeth Warren ginning up the leftwing of the Democratic Party who are professional haters of business. This is absolute nonsense,” Toomey said.

“There is a tiny provision in Dodd-Frank that forces banks do something that is counter productive, it forces, in fact it increases taxpayer risk because it forces them to do some of their risk management outside the bank in a separate subsidiary where they can’t manage their risk as well. Nobody thinks this is a good idea. No regulators do, nobody who understands banking does, nobody who understands risk management. So all it does is it says banks can conduct their ordinary risk management processes within the institution itself.”

“Elizabeth Warren sees this as an opportunity to just gin up the leftwing. Let’s not go for that.”

For the third day in a row, Senator Warren was railing against the buddy legislation that comes from the Wall Street whore like Toomey (not to mention Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer), none of whom want to go on record supporting this unpopular legislation but all of whom are unwilling to allow the government to continue functioning if they don't get their way by gutting taxpayer protections.

I’m back on the floor to talk about a dangerous provision that was slipped into a must-pass spending bill at the last minute to benefit Wall Street. This provision would repeal a rule called, and I’m quoting the title of the rule, “PROHIBITION AGAINST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS OF SWAPS ENTITIES.” 

On Wednesday, I came to the floor to talk to Democrats, asking them to strip this provision out of the omnibus bill and protect taxpayers.

On Thursday, I came to the floor to talk to Republicans. Republicans say they don’t like bailouts either. So I asked them to vote the way they talk. If they don’t like bailouts, then they could take out this provision that puts taxpayers right back on the hook for bailing out big banks.

Today, I’m coming to the floor not to talk about Democrats or Republicans, but about a third group that also wields tremendous power in Washington: Citigroup.

Mr. President, in recent years, many Wall Street institutions have exerted extraordinary influence in Washington’s corridors of power, but Citigroup has risen above the others. Its grip over economic policymaking in the executive branch is unprecedented. Consider a few examples:

•          Three of the last four Treasury Secretaries under Democratic presidents have had close Citigroup ties. The fourth was offered the CEO position at Citigroup, but turned it down.

•         The Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve system is a Citigroup alum.

•         The Undersecretary for International Affairs at Treasury is a Citigroup alum.

•          The U.S. Trade Representative and the person nominated to be his deputy-- who is currently an assistant secretary at Treasury-- are Citigroup alums.

•          A recent chairman of the National Economic Council at the White House was a Citigroup alum.

•          Another recent Chairman of the Office of Management and Budget went to Citigroup immediately after leaving the White House.

•          Another recent Chairman of the Office of Management of Budget and Management is also a Citi alum-- but I’m double counting here because now he’s the Secretary of the Treasury.

That’s a lot of powerful people, all from one bank. But they aren’t Citigroup’s only source of power. Over the years, the company has spent millions of dollars on lobbying Congress and funding the political campaigns of its friends in the House and the Senate.

Citigroup has also spent millions trying to influence the political process in ways that are far more subtle-- and hidden from public view. Last year, I wrote Citigroup and other big banks a letter asking them to disclose the amount of shareholder money they have been diverting to think tanks to influence public policy. Citigroup’s response to my letter? Stonewalling. A year has gone by, and Citigroup didn’t even acknowledge receiving the letter.

Citigroup has a lot of money, it spends a lot of money, and it uses that money to grow and consolidate a lot of power. And it pays off. Consider a couple facts.

Fact one:  During the financial crisis, when all the support through TARP and from the FDIC and the Fed is added up, Citi received nearly  half a trillion dollars in bailouts. That’s half a trillion with a “t.” That’s almost $140 billion more than the next biggest bank got.

Fact two: During Dodd-Frank, there was an amendment introduced by my colleague Senator Brown and Senator Kaufman that would have broken up Citigroup and the nation’s other largest banks. That amendment had bipartisan support, and it might have passed, but it ran into powerful opposition from an alliance between Wall Streeters on Wall Street and Wall Streeters who held powerful government jobs. They teamed up and blocked the move to break up the banks-- and now Citi is bigger than ever.

The role that senior officials working in the Treasury department played in killing the amendment was not subtle: A senior Treasury official acknowledged it at the time in a background interview with New York Magazine. The official from Treasury said, and I’m quoting here, “If we’d been for it, it probably would have happened. But we weren’t, so it didn’t.” That’s power.

Mr. President, Democrats don’t like Wall Street bailouts. Republicans don’t like Wall Street bailouts. The American people are disgusted by Wall Street bailouts. And yet here we are-- five years after Dodd-Frank-- with Congress on the verge of ramming through a provision that would do nothing for middle class, do nothing for community banks-- do nothing but raise the risk that taxpayers will have to bail out the biggest banks once again.

There’s a lot of talk lately about how the Dodd-Frank Act isn’t perfect. There’s a lot of talk coming from Citigroup about how the Dodd-Frank Act isn’t perfect.

So let me say this to anyone who is listening at Citi: I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn’t perfect.



It should have broken you into pieces.

If this Congress is going to open up Dodd-Frank in the months ahead, let’s open it up to get tougher-- not to create more bailout opportunities.

If we are going to open up Dodd-Frank, let’s open it up so that, once and for all, we end Too Big to Fail. And I mean let’s really end it-- not just say we did.

Instead of passing laws that create new bailout opportunities for Too-Big-To-Fail banks, let’s pass Brown-Kaufman.  Let’s pass the bipartisan 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act-- a bill I’ve sponsored with John McCain, Angus King, and Maria Cantwell. Let’s pass something-- anything-- that would help break up these giant banks.

A century ago, Teddy Roosevelt was America’s trustbuster. He went after the giant trusts and monopolies in this country, and a lot of people talk about how those trusts deserved to be broken up because they had too much economic power. But Teddy Roosevelt said we should break them up because they had too much political power. Teddy Roosevelt said break them up because all that concentrated power threatened the very foundations of our democratic system. 

And now we’re watching as Congress passes yet another provision that was written by lobbyists for the biggest recipient of bailout money in the history of the country.  And it’s attached to a bill that needs to pass or else the entire federal government will grind to a halt.

Think about this kind of power. A financial institution has become so big and so powerful that it can hold the entire country hostage. That alone is a reason enough for us break them up. Enough is enough.

Enough is enough with Wall Street insiders getting key position after key position and the kind of cronyism we have seen in the executive branch. Enough is enough with Citigroup passing 11th hour deregulatory provisions that nobody takes ownership over but that everybody comes to regret. Enough is enough.

Washington already works really well for the billionaires and big corporations and the lawyers and lobbyists. But what about the families who lost their homes or their jobs or their retirement savings the last time Citi bet big on derivatives and lost? What about the families who are living paycheck to paycheck and saw their tax dollars go to bail Citi out just six years ago? We were sent here to fight for those families, and it’s time-- it’s past time-- for Washington to start working for them.

Buddies of buddies