Discount window bailout operations for banks are now officially worse in magnitude than in 2008, though not in scope

We don't have 500 bank failures.

What we do have is Dodd-Frank 2010 limits on deposit insurance not keeping up with 2023 realities.

Unless Congress steps in and helps high depositors, there will be an exodus of high depositor accounts all across the country to money center banks which have too big to fail status and an FDIC put as systemically important enough to backstop.

This would mean many local banks will come under stress and at minimum weaken local economies even if they don't fail.

We do not need the big banks to become any more powerful than they already are.

And we certainly must not weaken local economies.

The reasons in the plumbing don't matter at this point. It's too late for that.

The $250k limit has to change. The authorities at the Fed, Treasury, and FDIC are constrained by that in what it is permissible for them to do.

Call your Senator.

Call your Representative.

 

You remember the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation, right?

 Chickens . . . comin' home . . . to roost!

 

Studies have found the Dodd–Frank Act has improved financial stability . . .  lol

 

Obama didn't "decimate" the Democrat Party, Democrats did that all by themselves

David M. Drucker here wants to blame Obama for all the electoral losses experienced by Democrats since 2009. 

Good luck with that.

Like it or not, the Democrat Congress under Pelosi and Reid gets the blame. They have done nothing but lose, lose and lose while Obama has remained the winner, above the fray. He leaves office popular, successfully escaping responsibility for his own administration for eight straight years while Democrats all over the country have paid the price.  

Democrat leadership rammed the awful Obamacare down the nation's throat, making the health insurance industry even worse than it was before. Democrat leadership failed to prosecute anyone for the 2008 banking panic and raked in the campaign cash from its grateful elite instead. Democrat leadership jacked up the federal spending which simply wasted money and ballooned the debt to $20 trillion in the process. Democrat leadership passed the growth-robbing Dodd-Frank legislation which has stalled the growth of credit and slowed the economy to a crawl.

The only thing you can blame Obama for is a lack of vision and leadership in preventing these developments and for not offering better alternatives. He was inexperienced, out of his depth and clueless, contenting himself to lecture everybody day and night in regal fashion while Congress shot themselves and the country in the foot with their stupid ideas. Obama's idea of compromise turned out to be signing awful Democrat legislation.

Except in one instance.

Obama agreed one time to compromise with John Boehner and make the Bush tax cuts permanent and fix the Alternative Minimum Tax. The stock market and the economy began to recover from that moment on at the dawn of 2013.

It was the only smart thing he ever did.

And there he goes into the sunset.

Les Deplorables: Under Obama full-time employment for Asians, Hispanics and blacks has recovered, but not for whites

Hm. How did that happen?

Maybe because race hiring quotas became de facto mandatory for private employers in late 2013 because of 2010's Dodd-Frank legislation.

Full-time for Asians in the core 25 to 54 years age group has recovered by 1,232,000 jobs after eight years

Full-time for Hispanics in the core 25 to 54 years age group has recovered by 1,426,000 jobs after nine years

Full-time for blacks in the core 25 to 54 years age group has recovered by 166,000 jobs after nine years

Full-time for whites in the core 25 to 54 years age group has not recovered and is still 4,368,000 jobs behind from 2007

Bank Failure Friday: the 18th of 2014 is in Mankato, MN

Northern Star Bank, Mankato, Minnesota, failed today, costing the FDIC $5.9 million.

As of September 30, 2014, there are 6,589 institutions remaining in the FDIC system.

That means that since the summer another 67 formerly independent participating institutions in the FDIC have left the system, most of which have been absorbed by larger institutions through acquisition and mergers because they were no longer able to survive and compete as stand-alone profitable banks in the new rigorous regulatory environment imposed under the Dodd-Frank legislation and Basel capital rules.

Over 300 formerly FDIC-participating institutions have suffered this same fate since the beginning of this year.

And in February 2007 there were 8,743 FDIC member institutions, 2,154 more than there are now. Only 500+ of these failed. The rest have been gobbled up by big-banking.

Rep. Tim Walberg (MI-7) admits everyone in the US House read the Cromnibus bill in July and knew what was in it

In a recent interview, here (Capital City Recap with Michael Cohen for Monday, December 15th), Republican Rep. Tim Walberg (MI-7) said one of the reasons he ended up voting for Cromnibus was that it overturned some parts of Dodd-Frank, a law which in his view is responsible for the middle class being "destroyed".

How putting the FDIC on the hook for derivatives is good for the public in a crisis like we just had is beyond me. The FDIC went severely into the red, had to be backstopped by the very public it serves, and then was replenished by raising rates on member banks which have crushed the small and regional banks who behaved honorably, and raised costs for everyone who uses a bank. The whole process has accelerated bank sales and consolidations, reducing competition in the industry. 

Well, at least Walberg acknowledges the middle class is in big trouble, unlike some people. But becoming "unbanked" is hardly at the top of the list of their troubles like being unemployed is.

Walberg also stated that voting against Cromnibus and shutting down the government as a possible consequence was not an option because that would have punished members of the American military who wouldn't get their paychecks, presumably at this the happiest time of the year. No, you wouldn't want to shut down the government and anger a government employee, no sir.

Maybe the most interesting thing Walberg said, however, and doubled-down on in the interview is that everyone in the House knew what was in the massive spending bill because they had all read the individual components of the bill in the form of individual legislation which they had passed in July and sent to the Senate piecemeal . . . all to die under the withering glare of Dirty Harry Reid.

So all the crap that's funded in the bill Rep. Tim Walberg is admitting to knowing about ahead of time, and voting for.

Read like what, here, but not after meals.

John Hope Bryant is an ignoramus about Jesus and poverty

Seen here:

'The Greek word for poor, as used by Jesus, is poucos, which means non-productivity. To be poor doesn’t mean you don’t have anything; it means you aren’t doing anything. Poverty is cured by hard work. “Lazy hands make a man poor” (Proverbs 10/4). The Bible says, “How long will you lie there, you sluggard? When will you get up from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest – and poverty will come on you like a bandit, and scarcity like an armed man.” Proverbs 6/10-11.'

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually the Greek word is properly transliterated "ptochos", not "poucos". And Bryant couldn't be more wrong about how the poor behave. The truly poor don't lay about and do nothing. The root of the word signifies that the poor do plenty . . . of crouching and begging.

But the worst thing is trying to baptize Jesus in this enterprise of viewing poverty as an evil, a problem to be solved. Unfortunately in the case of Jesus it's exactly the opposite of what Bryant thinks.

Frankly, Jesus prized poverty and required it as a condition of discipleship: "So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:33).

John Hope Bryant is all over the place in a media onslaught spreading his silly message about the poor saving capitalism, nevermind they can't save for the next month let alone the system most notably conceptualized by Adam Smith, a man feeble in neither mind nor money.

Expect more of this pap from Bryant and your federal government, through his connection with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a propaganda project of the Dodd-Frank bill.

The Bureau's current director, by the way, was an unconstitutional recess appointment by the president according to a Supreme Court ruling just in recent days.

Bank purchases of Treasurys at highest level since 1Q 1994 help drive demand and prices higher, yields lower

The Wall Street Journal reports here:

U.S. banks also have been big buyers of government debt. Treasury bondholdings of commercial banks and savings institutions rose to $237.2 billion at the end of March, the highest since 1995, according to data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Traders and analysts said the purchases have been driven by tighter banking regulations aiming at improving banks' balance sheets after the 2008 financial crisis. Overhauls such as the Dodd-Frank financial law in the U.S. and global regulations require financial institutions to hold more high-graded debt. The $12 trillion U.S. Treasury bond market is the world's most liquid bond market.

--------------------------------------------

The 1Q 1994 level held by financial institutions was $310 billion.

The 10 year Treasury yield fell to 2.44% yesterday. On May 1 it had stood at 2.57%.

Bank mergers have doubled annually since 2009 as Dodd-Frank and now new capital rules begin to bite

The Wall Street Journal reports here:

More small banks are selling themselves, and executives say Washington regulations are a big reason why. ... In all, there were 204 bank mergers in 2013 in which the target bank had less than $1 billion in assets, according to financial-research firm SNL Financial. That is about the same as the 206 in 2012 and up significantly from 102 in 2009, before Dodd-Frank was passed in 2010. As recently as 2011, the number was 130. ... Many bankers think smaller banks now must have at least $1 billion in assets to cope with the increased regulatory burden. ... One issue some small banks say they are having a big problem with is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's new "qualified mortgage" rules, or QM, which require lenders to make sure borrowers can afford the mortgages they take out. Some banks say following the rules, which took effect in January, has been complicated and time-consuming.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New capital rules being phased in between now and 2018 will require the largest banks to boost capital to 5% of assets from 3% and include risk assets in the calculations according to the New York Times, here:

Under the rule, banks with over $700 billion in assets will have to raise their capital, measured by the leverage ratio, to 5 percent of their overall assets. The ratio will have to be 6 percent at the banks’ federally insured banking subsidiaries, where many of their riskiest activities are. ... Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio, who has introduced a bill with Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, that envisions higher leverage ratios than those approved on Tuesday, said, “Today’s rule is a major step forward, but we can and must do more.”

Stupid: Well, There It Is

P.J.O'Rourke, here:

Call a man, best of all, wicked and you get to don the sacramental vestments, climb into the pulpit and thunder forth with such a sermon as to bring him weeping to the font of righteousness or cause the Lord God Almighty to strike him with a thunderbolt in his pew or something fun like that. But call a man stupid and . . . there it is.

And there it is: Dopey stimulus, obtuse bailout, noodle-headed Obamacare, half-wit Dodd-Frank, damfool IRS Tea Party crashers, AP and Fox News beset by oafish peeping Toms and the Benghazi tale told by an idiot. One could go on. Stupid is a great force in human affairs. And the great force has a commander in chief.

TNR Blames And Credits JK Galbraith For Contemporary Financier Fascism

It would be nice if liberals could make up their mind.

The New Republic's Tim Noah here traces TARP, Dodd-Frank and ultimately the general state of regulatory capture (Stigler) of the government by the banks to John Kenneth Galbraith's vision in his 1967 The New Industrial State:

Galbraith (who died in 2006) argued that big U.S. corporations had become immune to competition. Any effort to break them up into smaller companies would neither succeed nor—given the complex challenges of a modern economy—be especially desirable. Better to keep them in harness through a partnership with government. “Planning,” Galbraith wrote (in a sentence you could probably get arrested for writing today), “must replace the market.”

Galbraith was writing about manufacturing giants like General Motors and U.S. Steel. These seemed indestructible at the time, but of course they would soon prove all too susceptible to competition from abroad. Still, Galbraith’s vision of the regulatory state comes pretty close to describing today’s relationship between the federal government and a different oligopoly: the Big Six megabanks. ...

When the 2008 financial crisis hit, the feds went into Galbraithian planning mode. They bailed out the banks through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), arranged mergers, and, through the Dodd-Frank bill, required big banks to prepare “living wills” showing how they would dismantle themselves in orderly fashion should the need arise. ...

Conservatives were wrong to oppose the government’s bank rescue . . ..

For conservatives who feel queasy advocating the breakup of private enterprises, MIT’s Johnson offers this consolation: Remember George Stigler. Stigler, a conservative economist who died in 1991, won the Nobel for a theory that basically said Galbraith’s partnership approach didn’t work because of “regulatory capture,” i.e., the various ways corporations tame their minders—for example, by maintaining a revolving door between industry and government. Rather than try to control powerful corporations, Stigler thought government should use antitrust law to break them up and let competition rein them in.

What's wrong with this analysis is that banking is not a private enterprise and hasn't been since 1913. The then new partnership of banking with government in 1913 failed in less than 20 years, requiring Glass-Steagall in 1933, which was reactionary liberalism at work. And what we have just witnessed is an instant replay of that debacle, only in faster motion. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 overturning Glass-Steagall took only 9 years to blow up. But unlike Glass-Steagall, the grotesque of interventions in the wake of this latest panic has done nothing to demarcate clearly the public vs. the private in banking, and consequently keeps the public, and the country, at risk while insuring advantage to those closest to the printing presses at the Treasury. Money goes to money, as they say out in the sticks.

It's not much solace that liberalism's fingerprints have been and continue to be all over the inception and development of financier fascism in the United States. There don't seem to be any conservatives smart enough to understand the advantage it presents to them, and to the country. Or maybe it's just that they've been captured, too.

Molly Ball Doth Espy The Flaccid Organ Called The Senate

For The Atlantic, here:

"The last time a major new piece of policy legislation passed the U.S. Senate was July 15, 2010.

"That's when the Dodd-Frank financial-reform bill came through the Senate. And it was 951 days ago."

Just before the Republicans retook the House in 2010, over 400 bills passed by the then Democrat-controlled House under Speaker Pelosi languished unactioned in Sen. Harry Reid's Democrat-controlled Senate, on which, see here.

ObamaCare Is Fascism? So Is The Federal Reserve.

And TARP. And Dodd-Frank.

So says Robert Romano for Investors.com here:

[ObamaCare] guarantees customers to large companies, in this case insurance providers that supported passage of the legislation, and in the process cartelizes the system.

In other words, private profits are being embedded into the law, and enforced by the bureaucracy, which will levy fines on individuals and employers that fail to comply with the mandates. ...

[T]he level of state control in this new system, and insurance industry participation in implementing it to its own benefit, is undeniable. It is corporatism defined.

One could compare it to the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 that implemented the National Recovery Administration, which may have been patterned after Mussolini's labor laws, as summarized in a 1991 Yale Law School study by James Whitman, before it was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court.

Or the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which gave privately owned banks the power to appoint regional Fed chairmen and outsourced creation of the public currency to a banking cartel.

Or more recently, one might examine the Troubled Asset Relief Fund (TARP), Dodd-Frank's "orderly liquidation fund" and the Fed's continued mortgage-backed securities purchase program — all bailout programs that privatize profits and socialize losses in the financial sector. More corporatism.

This country has been a veritable cornucopia of fascism since the days of Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

Has free market capitalism failed in the United States? It's hardly been tried.

Of 7000 Banks, 3500 Need Recapitalization, 2000 Need To Sell

So note various experts in this story by Stephen Gandel for Fortune, who concludes:

Mortgage rates are about one percentage point higher than they would be if we had more competition. Apply that to all mortgages, and that higher interest rate costs consumers about $100 billion a year in extra interest. Not to mention all those who can't actually get refinanced. I'd say that's pretty good evidence that we should figure out a way to keep small banks around.

The bottom line: Dodd-Frank will not go away because Obama is not going away, so up to as many as 6300 banks may go away, destroying what's left of free market competition in banking. The people are already the losers, and stand to lose even more.

Since the beginning of 2008, 460 banks have failed.

Obama's Version Of Afroman's "Because I Got High"

It's like I don't care about nothing man

Roll another joint, ooh la da da da la da da la la da da

I was gonna start an economic boom, until I got high

I was gonna stop and end the doom, but then I got high

This country is still a tomb and I know why

(Why man?)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I was gonna cut the price of gas before I got high

I coulda drilled and kicked some ass, but I got high

(Uh uh la la da da)

Now the voters are takin' a pass and I know why

(Why man? Hey hey)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

(Go to the next one, go to the next one, go to the next one)

I was gonna git down to The Oval, but then I got high

(Oh oh)

I was gonna work on a campaign slogan, but I got high

(La da da da da)

So it's jus' "Forward" from Joe Stalin and I know why

(Why man?)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I was gonna find me a new church before I got high

I was gonna drop that Muslim lurch, but then I got high

(No you wasn't)

That Arab Spring won't bear research and I know why

(Why man? Yeah)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I wasn't gonna bail out the bankers, but I was high

(Uh, I'm serious man)

I was gonna jail all the wankers, but I was high

(Uh)

Now I'm just an old Dodd-Franker and I know why

(Ha ha ha, why man?)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I was gonna pay for the bills I wrote until I got high

(Say what? Say what?)

I wasn't gonna gamble all our gold, but then I got high

(Uh uh)

Now the debt load's sinkin' the boat and I know why

(Why man?)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I was gonna give you the public option, but then I got high

(Ooh, I'm serious)

I was gonna make it much cheaper too, but then I got high

(Oh)

Y'all'll be screwed before I'm through and I know why

(Ah, trying to shut off, ha ha ha)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I transformed the entire country because I got high

(Go go go)

I made every last road bumpy because I got high say

(What? Say what? Say what?)

It'll soon be third-world-dumpy and I know why

(Why man? Yeah yeah)

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I'ma stop singing this song because I'm high

(Raise the ceiling baby)

I'm singing this whole thing wrong because I'm high

(Bring it back)

And if I don't sell one copy, I'll know why

(Why man? Yeah)

'Cause I'm high, 'cause I'm high, 'cause I'm high

La la da da da da la da da da shoobe do be do wa

Skibitty do da da da la get jiggy with it scubbydooby wa

(original video here)

FDIC's New Liquidation Authority Under Dodd-Frank Latest Example Of Obama Fascism

It's not fascism when we do it.

Peter Wallison for Bloomberg.com doesn't come right out and say it, of course, but the FDIC's new liquidation authority under Dodd-Frank is the very embodiment of Obama's fascist vision for America and a crucial instrument for its implementation:

Under the plan, the agency would create a bridge institution to assume the assets and liabilities of a failed firm and could force some creditors to take equity in place of their debt holdings. ...

The powers granted by the liquidation authority to the secretary of the Treasury are unprecedented. With the concurrence of the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, the secretary can seize any financial firm -- not just the largest ones -- if he believes its failure would cause instability in the U.S. financial system.

If the firm’s directors object to the seizure, the secretary can apply to a U.S. district court for an order authorizing him to appoint the FDIC as receiver. The court has one day -- yes, one day -- to decide whether the secretary’s judgment was correct. If the court takes no action within this window, the firm is turned over to the FDIC. It’s a felony to disclose that the secretary has applied for the court order. The constitutional issues here are obvious and breathtaking. ...

Essentially, there’s no appeal. The secretary’s seizure isn’t subject to a stay or injunction, and once the firm has been delivered into the arms of the FDIC, it’s as good as dead.

Read the entire column, here.

Dodd-Frank is 848 Pages Long, Glass-Steagall was 37 Pages

Robert Lenzner reminds us here that the shorter one worked pretty well for a pretty long time, but the longer one which replaces it is already a disaster.

For The Economist article referred to by Lenzner, see here, including an important cost correction correcting billions to millions. (Oops).

Herman Cain's TARP Comments Now and Then Reveal That He Has No Clearly Defined Objection to Government Ownership of 'Private' Industry

In June 2011, here:

I studied the financial meltdown and concluded on my own that we needed to do something drastic, yes. When the concept of TARP was first presented to the public, I was willing to go along with it. But then when the administration started to implement it on a discretionary basis, picking winners and losers and also directing funds to General Motors and others that had nothing to do with the financial system, that's where I totally disagreed. 

We should -- the government should not be selecting winners and losers, and I don't believe in this concept of too big to fail. If they fail, the free market will figure out who's going to pick the up the pieces.

In October 2011 here:

CAIN: I have said before that we were in a crisis at the end of 2008 with this potential financial meltdown. I supported the concept of TARP, but then, when this administration used discretion and did a whole lot of things that the American people didn't like, I was then against it. So yes, and I'm owning up to that. 

Now, getting back to the gentleman's question in terms of what we need to do, we need to get government out of the way. It starts with making sure that we can boost this economy and then reform Dodd-Frank and reform a lot of these other regulations that have gotten in the way -- 

COOPER: Time. 

CAIN: -- and let the market do it just like Mitt has talked about.

So Herman's story now is that he is upset that winners and losers were picked under TARP by the Obama regime. Bailing out banks was OK. GM? Not so much.

To Herman, however, picking winners and losers just among the banks doesn't seem to matter, where TARP obviously was used to pick winners and losers in that industry. Just ask all the sound banks who've had to ante up advance FDIC insurance fund premiums to restore the depleted DIF used to help the failing and see how they feel about all the special treatment the big bad boys received at their expense.

Here is Herman just three weeks after passage of TARP in October of 2008, raising no objection whatsoever to the new strategy of picking winners in the banking industry:

[I]nstead of buying toxic mortgage-related assets of banks as originally proposed, the Treasury has changed tactics and will buy equity positions called preferred stocks, which gives us as taxpayers an ownership stake in their success for a limited period of time.

Herman is making things up as he goes on many issues, editing his positions as he becomes aware of the inconsistencies of his own statements.

Not surprising, but not very encouraging.

Standards are Inimical to the Left, That's Why Ratings Agencies are the Enemy

As here at Slate.com:

"If everyone hates the credit rating agencies, why won't anyone enforce the Dodd-Frank provision to dethrone them?"

Under Bair, FDIC Sought and Won Powers Nothing Short of Fascist

With Sheila Bair out after five years, the authors of this piece in Forbes don't exactly call a spade a spade, but their message is unmistakeable nonetheless:

The legislation [Dodd-Frank] granted the FDIC additional powers, including the extraordinary power to liquidate systemically important non-bank institutions.

One nation, under the banks and for the banks, and anyone else large enough to give us a campaign contribution or a job when we leave office.

Working it, as ever.