Why is Obama Supporting the Volcker Rule & Banking Reforms? – Susanne Posel | Susanne Posel.

Susanne Posel 
Occupy Corporatism
December 11, 2013

The bankers have written the most integral rule that would reform their business practices and President Obama is showing his support.

Obama has released a written statement supporting the new Volcker Rule that will make “sure big banks can’t make risky bets with their customer’s deposits.”

Obama said: “Our financial system will be safer and the American people are more secure because we fought to include this protection in the law.”

Speaking about the crash of 2008, Obama admonished the banks for “fueling a punishing recession on Main Street that ultimately cost millions of jobs and hurt families across the country.”

As part of the economic repair of our country, the president said that financial “rules that reward sound financial practices allow honest innovation and strengthen the financial system’s ability to support job creation and durable economic growth.”

Obama said that the Volcker Rule will make “it illegal for firms to use government-insured money to make speculative bets that threaten the entire financial system, and demand a new era of accountability from CEOs who must sign off on their firm’s practices.”

This new rule will ensure that ‘our financial system will be safer.”

Experts say that the new Volcker Rule glosses over the fact that it was “trading mishaps” that were the “root cause of the financial crisis.”

Because of this, “the rule doesn’t go far enough . . . prohibition [will] draw a line, making it clear that banks’ business is about lending not investing.”

The Volcker Rule, within the Dodd-Frank law, is now being used by the president as a public relations ploy to give Americans a semblance ofgovernment oversight and the reining in of “risk taking after the financial crisis.”

The new Volcker Rule was created by the banks and is “the rule that the banks wanted.”

The 2011 draft of the Volcker Rule was leaked by the American Banker Association (ABA).

Rob Tooney, associate general counsel at the Financial Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (FSIFMA) said : “Our concern is that whatever the final rule is that it doesn’t harm the markets’ overall liquidity. The short answer is we don’t know yet.”

The new rule was reported “far more restrictive than previously expected” and now that the banks have taken over the writing of the document, they feel more comfortable in supporting its passage.

Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank (FRB) said at a central bank meeting this week: “Getting to this vote has taken longer than we would have liked, but five agencies have had to work together to grapple with a large number of difficult issues and respond to extensive public comments.”

In 2010, Alan Blinder, economist of Princeton stated of the burgeoning Dodd-Frank law in an op-ed piece : “It is devilishly difficult to draw bright lines between proprietary trading and trading, hedging, and market-making on behalf of clients.”

Paul Volcker said he was “disappointed with how the rule was turning out” and that he “didn’t expect the proposal to be diluted so much, said a person with knowledge of his views. He’s content with language that bans banks from trading with their own capital, the person said.”

The Dodd-Frank Law was signed that same year.

Volcker contended that the rule should have “clear concise definitions, firmly worded prohibitions, and specificity in describing the permissible activities will be of prime importance for the regulators as they implement and enforce this law.”

In 2011, Senator Carl Levin co-sponsored the Volcker Rule and spoke toCongress about the importance of the regulation: “The Volcker Rule is essential to protect taxpayers from banks’ excessive financial risk-taking, conflicts of interest, and from the resulting billion-dollar bailouts. I look forward to reviewing the proposed rule and hope the regulators reject efforts to weaken the law.”

In early 2012, Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JP Morgan Chase & Co, brazenly told media : “If you want to be trading, you have to have a lawyer and a psychiatrist sitting next to you determining what was your intent every time you did something.”

In another interview, Dimon said of Volcker: “Paul Volcker, by his own admission, has said he doesn’t understand capital markets. Honestly, he has proven that to me.”

Lawrence Fink, chief executive of BlackRock commented : “We are not in support of it. We sent the letter as a firm. It’s very hard for me to understand how to navigate the Volcker Rule. What is proprietary trading? What is flow trading? It’s going to be very definitional.”

Volcker responded to critics, saying: “A lot of the criticism is over the complexity of the thing and, essentially it’s down to a lot of details. But the basic rule, of course, is incorporated in the law. And I think when you get all finished with this Sturm und Drang in the Congress now, I think you’re going to have a reasonable interpretation of a law and an interpretation that can be reasonably followed by the banks and enforced by the regulators.”

This past summer, Jacob Lew, secretary of the US Treasury, warned of a year’s end deadline on the Volcker Rule.

Lew said: “I want to mention that the Volcker Rule is particularly important, and I will continue to push for swift completion of a rule that keeps faith with the intent of the statute and the president’s vision.”