Dem Warfare on Derivatives Proposal

Lauren Victoria Burke/WDCPIX.COM

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) can add a new group to her growing list of opponents in Washington and on Wall Street: House Democrats, led by Rep. Michael McMahon (D-NY). McMahon, Bloomberg reports, is leading a bloc of Democrats who want to kill the toughest of Lincoln’s derivatives regulation proposals—namely, forcing big banks to break off their “swaps” desks. “The House bill is based on principles on how to reduce risk and make the system more transparent,” McMahon said, “it’s not based on wiping out the system or destroying the system and that’s what the provision does.”

The swaps trading desks that Lincoln wants to cut out of banks are highly profitable operations that trade complex financial products like derivatives, whose value depends on that of an underlying asset (wheat, oil, or a stock). Lincoln believes these trading desks are too risky to remain in taxpayer-backed banks. Her demand to make banks convert their swaps desks into separate subsidiaries or divest them altogether, and her fight to keep that provision in the Senate’s financial reform bill, has earned her plenty of opponents in addition to McMahon—all of Wall Street, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Senate banking committee chair Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, and a slew of others. Indeed, Dodd briefly flirted with the idea of killing Lincoln’s provision while the Senate was still negotating its own bill earlier this month, but Lincoln demanded the provision remain—which it did.

Another House Democrat, Gary Ackerman of New York, wrote to top House leaders to warn them of the consequences of Lincoln’s swaps desk proposal, Bloomberg noted. “We are deeply concerned by the very real possibility that, as a result of the Senate derivatives provision, America’s largest financial institutions will move their $600 trillion derivatives businesses overseas, at the expense of both New York’s and the United States’ economy,” Ackerman wrote.

Complicating the debate on Lincoln’s proposal is her midterm election this fall. Senate lawmakers had held off on fighting over the provision last week to avoid hurting Lincoln’s chances in her Democratic primary race against progressive candidate Bill Halter. In the primary, though, neither Democratic candidate secured 50 percent of the vote, leading to a June 8 run-off and prolonging the uncertainty over whether Lincoln’s rule would survive or not. There’s no doubt that Lincoln will continue fighting for her swaps desk rule at least until that run-off to maintain her unrelenting stance toward regulating Wall Street. The question is whether Lincoln, now largely on her own, can withhold the barrage of criticism and opposition that grows by the day. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate