Financial overhaul passes key procedural hurdle with 60-38 vote

[bobbyw24]

By Silla Brush - 07/15/10 11:31 AM ET

The Senate voted Thursday to end debate on sweeping financial overhaul legislation, putting one of President Obama’s highest priorities on a glide path to enactment.

The Senate voted 60-38 on a key procedural motion to end debate on the 2,315-page bill. The move sets up a final vote as early as Thursday afternoon. The House already approved the legislation.


“We all know Wall Street isn’t going to reform itself,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). “Those who vote ‘no’ are standing with the same bankers who gambled with our homes and economic security in the first place.”

Republicans Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Scott Brown (Mass.) joined all but one Democrat in support of the legislation. Sen. Russ Feingold (Wis.) was the lone Democrat opposed to the measure, which he said was not tough enough on the industry.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/108989-financial-overhaul-passes-key-procedural-hurdle-60-38

[John Taylor]

By Silla Brush - 07/15/10 11:31 AM ET

The Senate voted Thursday to end debate on sweeping financial overhaul legislation, putting one of President Obama’s highest priorities on a glide path to enactment.

The Senate voted 60-38 on a key procedural motion to end debate on the 2,315-page bill. The move sets up a final vote as early as Thursday afternoon. The House already approved the legislation.


“We all know Wall Street isn’t going to reform itself,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). “Those who vote ‘no’ are standing with the same bankers who gambled with our homes and economic security in the first place.”

Republicans Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Scott Brown (Mass.) joined all but one Democrat in support of the legislation. Sen. Russ Feingold (Wis.) was the lone Democrat opposed to the measure, which he said was not tough enough on the industry.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/108989-financial-overhaul-passes-key-procedural-hurdle-60-38

This is the worst news since Sarbanes-Oxley. This will crush entrepreneurship even more.

[ChaosControl]

“Those who vote ‘no’ are standing with the same bankers who gambled with our homes and economic security in the first place.”

This is the kind of b.s. I see the rabid partisan hack liberals on forums say. So that must be where they learned such stupidity from.

[Bruno]

Scott Brown for the fail

[YumYum]

How is this going to hurt business?

[John Taylor]

How is this going to hurt business?

I'm not surprised you're entirely ignorant of the crushing effect regulation has on entrepreneurship, but I'll see what I can do to give you some basics. 1) Government regulatory agencies are born (or soon become) "captured" by the self-same industries they were created to watch... the regulatory agencies become a revolving door for "businessmen" who have no scruples about using the power of government, including its regulatory power, to prevent entrepreneurs from entering their field and competing. Regulations make market entry more expensive, and act as a barrier to entry.

[constituent]

so hey, has ron paul inserted anything in here to get those who default on student loans off the hook for paying into social security/medicare/medicaid/etc. when they'll never receive those benefits?

if not, why not?

[YumYum]

I'm not surprised you're entirely ignorant of the crushing effect regulation has on entrepreneurship, but I'll see what I can do to give you some basics. 1) Government regulatory agencies are born (or soon become) "captured" by the self-same industries they were created to watch... the regulatory agencies become a revolving door for "businessmen" who have no scruples about using the power of government, including its regulatory power, to prevent entrepreneurs from entering their field and competing. Regulations make market entry more expensive, and act as a barrier to entry.

You are generalizing. I didn't ask for a generalization about government regulations. I asked a specific question. Have you read the 2,315 page bill? If not, you have no valuable input as to why this bill will hurt businesses. Try giving specifics.

[John Taylor]

You are generalizing. I didn't ask for a generalization about government regulations. I asked a specific question. Have you read the 2,315 page bill? If not, you have no valuable input as to why this bill will hurt businesses. Try giving specifics.

I've read portions of it.

Have you read it, if not, why are you still talking?

[YumYum]

I've read portions of it.

Have you read it, if not, why are you still talking?

You are the one who claims the bill sucks. I asked you "Why?" You can't give me an answer with specifics; you can only generalize that "it sucks". Are you really an attorney?:confused: