Following the 2008 financial crisis, Barack Obama and his liberal allies passed one of the most biggest pieces of regulatory legislation in modern history: Dodd-Frank.
The law places extremely burdensome regulations on banks and other financial institutions, with the alleged goal of preventing another financial crisis. In reality, Dodd-Frank proved to be a disaster and simply gave more power to the federal government over our economy, and failed to address the root cause of the 2008 financial crisis.
Well, now that Republicans are in power, they have their sights set on Dodd-Frank, and the House of Representatives voted 233-186 to replace the disastrous law with their own piece of legislation.
— The Hill (@thehill) June 8, 2017
From The Washington Examiner:
Authored by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, the conservative chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, the bill is perhaps second only to the healthcare legislation Republicans passed last month in its scope and significance. Like the healthcare bill, it would undo one of Obama’s top legislative achievements, the new rules imposed on the financial sector in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. Republicans justify the bill on the grounds that the regulations are holding down economic growth.
A main feature of the legislation would be an offer to banks: If they maintain a significantly higher level of capital, they would receive additional regulatory relief — the choice for which the bill is named. Higher capital means less indebtedness and more funding through ownership stakes. The idea is that requiring higher capital would reduce the likelihood of a bank collapsing and also institute more market discipline because owners have more skin in the game.
No banks that had the levels of capital required by the bill failed during the crisis, noted Rep. Paul Mitchell, a Michigan freshman. For 18 months during the crisis, Mitchell recounted in explaining his support for the legislation, the career training business of which he was CEO didn’t know if the megabank it relied on to make payroll would go bust, taking his company with it.
Aside from that provision, the bill would limit the new powers granted to regulators, eliminate the “Volcker Rule” preventing banks from speculating with deposits insured by the federal government, and dramatically scale back the role of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Democrats in the Senate have pledged to filibuster the Republican bill, as they want to keep Dodd-Frank’s burdensome regulations in place. The replacement bill would unshackle banks from Obama’s banking regulations and allow our financial institutions to make investment decisions that are best for their customers.
The left is, unsurprisingly, opposed to this bill, as their opposition to the financial industry is well-known. Dodd-Frank was one of Obama’s signature pieces of legislation that he enacted during his first term in office, and a repeal of this law would ruin his liberal legacy forever.
Rather than obstruct, Democrats should do their elected duty and work with Republicans to make necessary changes to Dodd-Frank, rather than just play to their liberal base.
Are you glad to see Republicans working to repeal Dodd-Frank? Do you think a replacement bill can pass the Senate? Share your thoughts below!