Centrist Dems Sink Biden's Nominee for Top Bank Regulator (axios.com) 213
Five Democratic senators have told the White House they won't support Saule Omarova to head the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, effectively killing her nomination for the powerful bank-regulator position. Axios: The defiant opposition from a broad coalition of senators reflects the real policy concerns they had with Omarova, a Cornell University law professor who's attracted controversy for her academic writings about hemming in big banks. Their opposition also hints at a willingness of some Democratic senators to buck the White House on an important nomination, even if it hands Republicans a political -- and symbolic -- victory.
Republicans have attacked the Kazakh-born scholar in remarkably personal terms, and turned her nomination into a proxy battle over how banks should be regulated. Driving the news: In phone call on Wednesday, Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), all members of the Senate Banking Committee, told Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) -- the panel's chairman -- of their opposition. They're joined in opposing her by Sens. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).
Republicans have attacked the Kazakh-born scholar in remarkably personal terms, and turned her nomination into a proxy battle over how banks should be regulated. Driving the news: In phone call on Wednesday, Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), all members of the Senate Banking Committee, told Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) -- the panel's chairman -- of their opposition. They're joined in opposing her by Sens. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).
This is very nerdly news (Score:3, Interesting)
I am unable to comment on this science.
Re: (Score:2)
You should have studied the dismal science [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Politics as an example of perpetual motion.
Re: This is very nerdly news (Score:2)
If you want to see fewer of these stories (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"News for Nerds" is so yesterday. It's now "Romping Ground for Astroturfers".
More like stuff that matters (Score:5, Insightful)
This is very nerdly news
I'd say its more stuff that matters.
I am disappointed I studied physics.
Well the focus in one narrow area does often lead to many personal blind spots.
I am unable to comment on this science.
On the bright side this does put you ahead of most other physics majors, at least you realize your skills are narrowly applied rather than broadly applied.
Re: (Score:2)
I am unable to comment on this science.
I'm sure fellow slashdotters can give advice. This is after all the most commented on story currently on the front page.
No dismal physics allowed (Score:2)
'Nuff said.
Re: This is very nerdly news (Score:5, Informative)
You didn't get the memo. Slashdot now lumps communism into tech news. Did you see this woman's resume? We aren't talking USSR ideals here. She is the incarnation of Communist China. -C.D.R-
Seriously? She was a member of the communist girl scouts when she was a child, it was effectively mandatory. Then she grew up and made her own mind up about politics. Just to demonstrate how asinine that ancient senator's questions were, It's a bit like claiming some grown woman is a Republican because she joined American Heritage Girls as a Pathfinder when she was six. People grow up and make up their own minds about the world.
My problem is with the T J Maxx thing (Score:2)
Couldn't Mr. Biden show more class by appointing someone who in graduate school is alleged to have boosted stuff from a Marshalls?
This is like that movie where Bette Midler's husband in a strained marriage played by Danny DeVito won't pay the ransom money, and her abductors try bargaining their demands -- downward.
Midler's character whines, "I've been kidnapped by . . . K-Mart!"
Re: (Score:3)
Silly you. Didn't you know that you are supposed to comply your way out if tyranny.
Re: This is very nerdly news (Score:5, Informative)
Liberalism has already been redefined. Many, make times. What was originally called liberalism is now referred to as classical liberalism. Today's liberals (which imo progressive is a better term for them) are generally opposed individualism, generally favor the idea of having a planned economy, and generally want to place more restrictions on speech. This is very far removed from what enlightenment era liberals were.
Re: This is very nerdly news (Score:2)
Many*
Ds and Rs (Score:4, Insightful)
This is where Democrats are different - their party is not a monolith, with centrists like Manchin on one side and self-professed socialists like Talib on the other an a spectrum inbetween. Republicans have become a hive mind, with anyone showing even the slightest daylight between Trump being drummed out of the party (see, for example, Liz Cheney).
Re:Ds and Rs (Score:5, Insightful)
Right now, the Republican Party has basically become a classic cult of personality. When Trump eventually dies, I imagine that will start to fracture. I'm sure a few people will try to insert themselves into his role, but that rarely works.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Right now, the Republican Party has basically become a classic cult of personality. When Trump eventually dies, I imagine that will start to fracture. I'm sure a few people will try to insert themselves into his role, but that rarely works.
This is not a new development for the GOP.
Plenty of them incl Gingrich were openly critical of Reagan when he was in office but fell into line worshipping his memory when the party decided to canonize him, making old Ronnie Raygun into the American Perón
Re: (Score:2)
I still remember when Spitting Image ran this running gag of Ronnie constantly looking for his brain... good old times when we thought Ronnie was the biggest dimwit to ever sit in the prez chair.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:2)
The President's Brain Is Missing!
They replaced it with jelly beans at one point, IIRC.
Re: (Score:3)
I still remember when Spitting Image ran this running gag of Ronnie constantly looking for his brain... good old times when we thought Ronnie was the biggest dimwit to ever sit in the prez chair.
There are always people who think what ever president that is occupying the chair in the Whitehouse as the biggest dimwit to ever sit there. It was actually hard to believe that when Regan went into office he would go on to be the greatest Presidents of the latter half of the 20th century. An then one of the greatest presidents of all time.
The thing that made him a great president is he sat down with the USA greatest enemy, the USSR, and treated them with respect. Reagan demonstrated to Gorbachev th
Re: (Score:2)
Erh... that's debatable. The USSR was done for in the mid 1980s. The system was dead. Gorbachev tried to fix it by giving the country a bit more freedom, but all that did was to dissolve it even faster. Not that trying to rule with an iron fist would have changed anything, save maybe a lot more people dead. The system was finished.
How much Ronnie really contributed to it will probably be hard to determine, but I dare say that it would have come down either way. What's lucky is that it was Gorbachev and not
Re: (Score:3)
Erh... that's debatable.
Actually, it's not.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:2)
I'll agree that he wasn't, and he holds many views abhorrent to Reagan Republicans, but he is 100% of the GOP today and anyone who disagrees with him is out.
Re: (Score:3)
Not true. The Republicans do not like Trump. They just know he is their best chance to regain the White House. I mean he did actually become President.
Would you accept that kind of asslicking behavior from Dems towards any of their candidates?
If not, then why not?
Re: (Score:2)
Would you accept that kind of asslicking behavior from Dems towards any of their candidates? If not, then why not?
Money must taste real good cause I’ve noticed if you follow the money the asslicking behavior is never far behind. That’s why I prefer candidates that are funded entirely from small donations from constituents. The asslicking isn’t nearly so bad when ones own ass is spotless not just billionaires and big business.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:2)
They may not like him, but none who plan to have a future in the GOP dare to utter that sentiment on the record.
Re: (Score:2)
You guys are delusional. Trump is not even really a Republican. He was a NY Democrat for most of his life. His buddies were all NYC Democrats.
Was he? Trump is a chameleon. He'll be anything it takes to obtain adulation, money and power.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:3)
Well, aside from the fact that the election didn't reek with fraud and the only ones in recent times being arrested for electral fraud being Republicans. But never mind the facts.
Re: (Score:2)
The way things are actually supposed to work in a democracy is that the public servants carry out the policy of the elected leaders.
Re:Ds and Rs (Score:5, Insightful)
The way things are actually supposed to work in a democracy is that the public servants carry out the policy of the elected leaders.
Yes, that is how things are supposed to work. But Congress has been ducking their constitutional responsibility to legislate for decades, and in doing so have greatly empowered the Executive Branch and its appointed officials.
And certainly if Congress doesn't trust someone to follow the regulations, they shouldn't approve the nomination.
Nothing about this is odd except the nomination of a Marxist to manage banking regulation.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:2)
This is pretty much it. They do not legislate because they do not want their name next to an unpopular vote. There is too much reelection incentive to get real work done.
Re: (Score:2)
Allowing parliament to absolve itself from doing its job should not be possible. Your whole set up needs to be reformed from the ground up.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that explains why 15 Republicans voted FOR the spending bill and 6 Democrats voted against.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:3, Insightful)
Those 15 Rs have received death threats, been criticized by GOP leadership, and Trump has announced he wants them all ousted in the next election. I haven't heard a peep from D leadership about the ones who voted against it.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
This is where Democrats are different - their party is not a monolith, with centrists like Manchin on one side and self-professed socialists like Talib on the other an a spectrum inbetween. Republicans have become a hive mind, with anyone showing even the slightest daylight between Trump being drummed out of the party (see, for example, Liz Cheney).
Liz Cheney wasn't drummed out of the party. She was sidelined, possibly more because she wasn't inline with their legislative agenda (although admittedly on its own might have been fine, too). She was treated badly by some on the Trump side. But she wasn't followed into the bathroom with a camera [usatoday.com], or to a friend's wedding [apnews.com], or blockaded in her car [nypost.com], which is how the moderate Ds are being treated by their party.
We've seen a shift of both parties to extremes [pewresearch.org], although as you can see the voting public is more
Re: (Score:3)
You know you're over the target when you start taking flak.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:3)
In education, the US barely gets in the top 30.
Re: (Score:2)
Rich people come here for the medicine, because it is the best here.
Your issue is everyone having it, almost certainly in your imagined context of price control and government-provisioning.
In which case, we would no longer have the best, and our care, and the rest of the world, would have worse and worse medicine as invention would slow.
Re: Ds and Rs (Score:5, Informative)
The Republicans who voted for it received death threats and were soundly criticized by Trump and GOP leadership.
Not really (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
All parties are conglomerates of different factions, hoping to scratch each other's back. Unlike parliamentary systems, they band together here because winning the presidency, and hence the power to veto bills, is crucial to lawmaking, and tiny regional or single-issue parties will never pass that door.
Sometimes, as when Latin-American Catholic Democrats passed Prop 8 in California, Democrats are shocked, shocked that their mutual back scratch coalition doesn't always hold together.
Rest assured, single-iss
She's a communist (Score:3, Insightful)
She got her BA from Moscow State University, which she attended on a Lenin Scholarship, and her undergraduate thesis was titled Karl Marx’s Economic Analysis and the Theory of Revolution in The Capital.
Exactly the experience you would look for when appointing someone to (checks notes) manage US banking regulations.
Re:She's a communist (Score:5, Informative)
She got her BA from Moscow State University, which she attended on a Lenin Scholarship, and her undergraduate thesis was titled Karl Marx’s Economic Analysis and the Theory of Revolution in The Capital.
Exactly the experience you would look for when appointing someone to (checks notes) manage US banking regulations.
This was almost 40 years ago...not long before coming to the US where she has achieved multiple degrees, worked for the George W Bush Administration, been a witness at Senate hearings on banking relations and become a Professor at Cornell Law School. You don't think that her ideas may have evolved a bit since then?
Look at trend (Score:4, Informative)
This was almost 40 years ago.
What was not 40 years ago were also statements saying that she wanted every citizen to have government run diigtal bank accounts only, totally replacing private banks.
I agree you could possibly explain away the history she had some time ago, but the more recent stuff was frankly even worse.
She was a die-hard communist just judging solely by the things she said recently, no Moscow University background required.
Re: (Score:3)
And was still praising the USSR as recently as 2019.
Re:She's a communist (Score:4, Insightful)
She got her BA from Moscow State University, which she attended on a Lenin Scholarship, and her undergraduate thesis was titled Karl Marx’s Economic Analysis and the Theory of Revolution in The Capital.
Exactly the experience you would look for when appointing someone to (checks notes) manage US banking regulations.
This was almost 40 years ago...not long before coming to the US where she has achieved multiple degrees, worked for the George W Bush Administration, been a witness at Senate hearings on banking relations and become a Professor at Cornell Law School. You don't think that her ideas may have evolved a bit since then?
I wonder if if instead of commies it was nazis, if you'd still be okay with "but but it was 40 years ago" argument.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
She's a communist? Good nomination Biden!
Communism, or any extreme socialism has failed miserably and caused terrible direct suffering to everyone living under it EVERY WHERE IT HAS BEEN TRIED, and everywhere it has fallen and failed.
So let's try it again!
Re: (Score:2)
Lets talk about gun violence.
You know she defected right? (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm happy to support communists. I'm not happy to support authoritarians.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly the experience you would look for when appointing someone to (checks notes) manage US banking regulations.
Yes indeed. We have seen how years of unregulated capitalism has lead to banks being the cause of multiple major economic recessions. It's about time you pick someone whos ideas lean the other way to reign them in.
You know, kind of like after 4 years of the Orange Shitshow you vote in Sleepy Joe just to get some peace and quiet.
More non-techy garbage (Score:2)
Not news for nerds
Good! (Score:3)
I aspire to be one of those few that uses the advantages of the system to help them take off with all the money. So shore up the foundation, and maintain steady state until I get mine. Then have at it.
Kyrsten Sinema (Score:2)
*shocked*
Rubbish (Score:2)
Yet Again another Slashdot article that is completely irrelevant
Lying Liars and the Lies they say (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
During the George W. Bush Administration, Omarova served in the Department of the Treasury as a special advisor on regulatory policy to the Under Secretary for Domestic Finance
Why would a fine patriot like George Bush hire a dirty communist?
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] During the George W. Bush Administration, Omarova served in the Department of the Treasury as a special advisor on regulatory policy to the Under Secretary for Domestic Finance
Why would a fine patriot like George Bush hire a dirty communist?
Because... he did want advisors representing different worldviews, recognizing that sometimes your opponents might have a point, unlike for example Bidet's echo chamber he's surrounded himself with? Doesn't mean she should be put in charge of anything.
AXIOS is a terrible source for news (Score:2)
I have no opinions on this particular nominee, I just followed the link to read up on it before coming here to comment.
The source is https://www.axios.com/democrat... [axios.com]
Please take a moment (literally, it only takes a moment) to read this article. The headline of the story is "Scoop: Centrist Dems sink Biden’s nominee for top bank regulator". Now answer the following questions, based on the article:
1. Why is the nominee being rejected by the "Centrist Dems"? What are their concerns?
2. Why is the administ
Because... (Score:2)
...it's a stupid idea to have a marxist be your chief BANK regulator.
Duh?
Re: She wants to do away with all private banking (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: She wants to do away with all private bankin (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In general, I wouldn't be against such an idea.
In a totally corrupt state as the US, I can't think of a worse idea.
Re: She wants to do away with all private bankin (Score:2)
Citation needed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's an easy and cheap shot to blame this on sexim, racism, or whatever-ism. But there are position papers, written by her, which propose a very radical restructuring of the financial institutions of the country. That doesn't sound like someone you'd put in a position to oversee / regulate an institution, but to restructure and overhaul it. But I don't believe that's what the job's mandate is, nor should be.
Her paper is freely available. Feel free to just read the summary, and if that doesn't raise your
Re: She wants to do away with all private banking (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: She wants to do away with all private banking (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe if congress hadn't hamstrung the USPS operations with unreasonable prepayment of future pension healthcare costs they could have been more competative with private companies like UPS and FedEx. https://about.usps.com/who-we-... [usps.com]
At least they seem to have finally wised up and rescinded that law. https://about.usps.com/who-we-... [usps.com]
Re: (Score:2)
OK, now we got the cheap shot and comedy answer, anyone here with the real one?
Re: She wants to do away with all private banking (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: She wants to do away with all private banking (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
From my understanding of what the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency can do these kind of changes are beyond the scope of the position and would need congressional help in the form of new laws for that kind of change to be implemented.
Re: (Score:2)
If that is a senator taking someone apart then I now know why nothing gets done in government these days.Toomey didn't really seem to be interested in hearing the response to any of his questions since he interrupted the reply before any meaningful answer was given.
Re: (Score:2)
You've a point, though it has nothing to do with the dangerous published policies of this nominee, which the Senator specifically brought up. I'm afraid you're engaging in "what-aboutism".
The nominee's policies abrogate Congress's control of national finance to the Executive branch, effectively setting up the Federal Reserve as an agency in charge of personal and corporate spending for climate control and other policies. It's a power grab for federal bureaucracy to sidestep Congressional budgeting and hand
Re: (Score:2)
Dems are going to lose both houses and the presidency in 2022/2024 not because of Biden and moves like this, but because they're too busy catering to the loudmouths on the far left, leaving the folks in the center and left of center behind. They are really alienating much of their party. And as influential Trump is, he'll probably win in 2024. Yes. The Republicans try to distance themselves from "The election was a fraud" slogan, but come 2024 when half the country is still following Trump, they'll fall
Re: (Score:2)
Covid isn't lethal enough to solve that problem by 2024.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Dems are going to lose both houses and the presidency in 2022/2024 not because of Biden and moves like this, but because they're too busy catering to the loudmouths on the Far Right, leaving the folks in the center and left of center behind. .
FTFY
Is that what she wants to do? (Score:5, Informative)
Have you actually read her proposal or are you repeating what political sources *say* she wants to do?
What she in fact actually proposed is for banks to stay in business granting loans, which is their actual money making activity. Holding your deposit and protecting it is just a necessary evil, banks don't actually make any money from *that*.
Under the current system you put your money in the bank and theoretically that's the money the bank loans out. In practice banks bundle and resell loans on the secondary market so that they aren't as dependent upon deposits as they were years ago; your deposit is more like seed money. Under her proposed system, you'd put your money in the Fed, the Fed issues it as cheap credit to the bank, and the bank loans it out exactly like it does now.
I have no idea whether such a scheme would actually work, but it's easy to see advantages to it. There would never be the need to bail out a retail bank, or even Federally insure it. Everyone's money would be as safe as safe can be and if the bank ever screwed up it could go out of business and nobody but the stockholders would have any reason to care. You'd miss Blockbuster Video more than you'd miss Wells Fargo.
The main reason for doing this is many people whom banks don't find it profitable to serve would have access to savings and checking accounts. This would help them to build capital and wealth and someday *become* a customer profitable for banks to serve.
Re:Is that what she wants to do? (Score:5, Informative)
Under the current system you put your money in the bank and theoretically that's the money the bank loans out.
Unfortunately that's not how the banking system works at all.
Bank of England white paper. [bankofengland.co.uk]
Private banks do not use depositor's money to lend out. They just create money by raising loans 'secured' against assets such as housing, businesses, art, magical rocks etc. Each time they create a new loan they add money to the financial system. The only real constraint on their ability to do this is whether they can convince everyone that asset prices are justified.
This is why the price of all assets has ballooned out since deregulation. Banks have gone on a debt issuing orgy (since issuing loans is how they make money) and this has increased the money supply much faster than supply of real income producing assets (aka useful stuff in the economy). This has caused yields to keep falling, and central banks to have to keep bailing the system out by slashing interest rates and doing QE, as they have no idea how low asset prices would go if they allowed the free market to price them instead.
Re: Is that what she wants to do? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly why I said "theoretically". The loan-the-depositors-money-out model is obsolete anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
"Under her proposed system, you'd put your money in the Fed,"
Creating a Single Point of Failure is not the solution to modern banking woes.
Re: She wants to do away with all private banking (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
> Someone else made that decision.
Golly who could that be.
https://youtu.be/JI2Xtqd4Mts [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:2)
At least he's not as cool as Zaphod Beeblebrox.
Re: (Score:2)
How about neither?
You know how long it has been since I would have voted FOR a candidate instead of just trying to vote on whoever as long as it is AGAINST the other one?
Re: (Score:2)
It is frustrating to see the troll mark on so many comments that are not trolling or wrong. Modding these comments down seems systemic in /. Lately, especially when there arent counter viewpoints. It seems the operators dont like these comments, because users are not commenting retorts.
Welcome to the club.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. But it's actually correct, because sometimes, and very often these days, stating a fact actually is trolling, because facts trigger dangerous emotions in some people.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So it's just like any other party?
Re: (Score:2)
The dems are waking up and realize they are getting paid by socialist and Marxist forces. They are going to lose big in the midterms and may never have power again.
I remember hearing something similar after Nixon beat McGovern like a rented mule.
Re: (Score:3)
Leaving people alone would be the wisest course of action, but the assholes that manage to crawl to the top are incapable of actually doing that or believing it prudent and if nothing else owe a lot of different people a lot
Re: Dems see the writing on the wall (Score:2)
You can, of course, produce legitimate political science definitions for these terms and not ones provided by supporters of a 1950s alcoholic senator?
Re: (Score:2)
Suddenly Biden is all worked up about fuel prices so he pulls the Release the Strategic Oil Reserve Kraken [whitehouse.gov] stunt and starts yelling at the usual scapegoats. [washingtonexaminer.com]
So, Russia and OPEC have announced the cancellation of planned production increases to coincide with the release from the strategic reserve, thus completely wiping out any small benefit that the release might have had. But, when the reserves are refilled, which they are required to be, oil prices will be 50 percent higher than they were when the reserves were previously filled. Brilliant!
Re: (Score:2)
Gas prices come down to supply and demand.
https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/0... [cnbc.com]
Re:Who is funding this? (Score:4)
There doesn't even have to be anyone paying, just check the front page and the number of comments on various topics. Examples:
"A Third of All Dark Web Domains Are Now V3 Onion Sites", 17 comments
"US To Require Vaccines For All Border Crossers In January", 203 comments
Notice something?
The political topics are simply something where everyone, no matter how singular digit the IQ, can write some kind of garbage without being instantly shot down for being factually wrong. Because it's trivially easy to shut someone up on a technical topic when he's a dimwit who knows fuck all. It's easy to show when he's talking out of his ass.
Not so easy with a topic like politics where now position is easily debunked as being wrong.
And people don't like being told that they know fuck all, so they mostly gravitate towards topics where they don't have to admit they're totally wrong when they spout their bullshit, because, hey, every opinion has a right to exist when it comes to politics, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't bother. You're not replying to rsilvergun, you're replying to a troll, check the spelling and UID. They are best ignored.
Re: (Score:2)
This was less to the troll and more to the general audience.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a BIG difference between an extremist and a communist though.
Well, ok, maybe not a big difference since a communist may be an extremist (depending on the context) but being an extremist doesn't guarantee you are a communist.