Congresswoman Maloney and the JEC Show Hints of Muscle

Congresswoman Maloney and the JEC Show Hints of Muscle

Congresswoman Maloney and the JEC Show Hints of Muscle

Yesterday’s hearing at the Joint Economic Committee, convened by Congresswoman Maloney, gave me some hope that Congress might be thinking about taking some leadership in systematically restructuring our financial system. I highly recommend that everyone watch the video.

Sam Brownback, Republican Congressman Burgess, Democratic Congressman Cummings, Democratic Congresswoman Maloney–unlikely bedfellows, to say the least–all appeared to accept the arguments of Joseph Stiglitz, Simon Johnson, and Thomas Hoenig, that the current PPIP and TARP projects are not just foolish but dangerous, and that we need a radical restructuring of the response to the crisis.

The panel starts with discussions of economic failure, but ends with the problems of political failure. As Congressman Burgess said in the opening remarks, "Trillions of taxpayer dollars are at risk, but congressional approval is not needed for the plan to proceed …on its face this is a violation of the democratic process."

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Yesterday’s hearing at the Joint Economic Committee, convened by Congresswoman Maloney, gave me some hope that Congress might be thinking about taking some leadership in systematically restructuring our financial system. I highly recommend that everyone watch the video.

Sam Brownback, Republican Congressman Burgess, Democratic Congressman Cummings, Democratic Congresswoman Maloney–unlikely bedfellows, to say the least–all appeared to accept the arguments of Joseph Stiglitz, Simon Johnson, and Thomas Hoenig, that the current PPIP and TARP projects are not just foolish but dangerous, and that we need a radical restructuring of the response to the crisis.

The panel starts with discussions of economic failure, but ends with the problems of political failure. As Congressman Burgess said in the opening remarks, "Trillions of taxpayer dollars are at risk, but congressional approval is not needed for the plan to proceed …on its face this is a violation of the democratic process."

Stiglitz described how "the big banks … tried to shape the view that there is no alternative than throwing [them] massive amounts of money." But he–and Johnson–also talked about how the revolving door between wall street and government is a real problem because of mindset, not just greed. If someone has "grown up" in the culture of big banks, he said, "they see things in this very peculiar way … we’ve seen some outstanding examples of that" in this crisis. "We’ve seen all our regulators get captured," said Johnson.

The hearing is intelligent, thoughtful, and shows some signs of life in our most representative branch, suggesting that Congress–chaotic, strange, over-gerrymandered, but still set up to be responsive to popular sentiment–might actually take some leadership in reform.

Congresswoman Maloney, in particular, asked repeated questions not just about what should be done, but how–you could watch her thinking about how Congress could take leadership.

Notably, every single member of the panel advocated regulations that would lead to encouraging small and medium sized banks, a more diverse and truly competitive system. As Johnson said, we have to break up the banks–both for our economic future, and to constrain the chances for regulatory capture in the future.

A hearing is not action, and the actions to date have been trivial. But with pressure, we could see Congress taking responsibility for economic policy; as Elizabeth Warren said the other day, we need people involved for our policy to improve.

We cannot back down

We now confront a second Trump presidency.

There’s not a moment to lose. We must harness our fears, our grief, and yes, our anger, to resist the dangerous policies Donald Trump will unleash on our country. We rededicate ourselves to our role as journalists and writers of principle and conscience.

Today, we also steel ourselves for the fight ahead. It will demand a fearless spirit, an informed mind, wise analysis, and humane resistance. We face the enactment of Project 2025, a far-right supreme court, political authoritarianism, increasing inequality and record homelessness, a looming climate crisis, and conflicts abroad. The Nation will expose and propose, nurture investigative reporting, and stand together as a community to keep hope and possibility alive. The Nation’s work will continue—as it has in good and not-so-good times—to develop alternative ideas and visions, to deepen our mission of truth-telling and deep reporting, and to further solidarity in a nation divided.

Armed with a remarkable 160 years of bold, independent journalism, our mandate today remains the same as when abolitionists first founded The Nation—to uphold the principles of democracy and freedom, serve as a beacon through the darkest days of resistance, and to envision and struggle for a brighter future.

The day is dark, the forces arrayed are tenacious, but as the late Nation editorial board member Toni Morrison wrote “No! This is precisely the time when artists go to work. There is no time for despair, no place for self-pity, no need for silence, no room for fear. We speak, we write, we do language. That is how civilizations heal.”

I urge you to stand with The Nation and donate today.

Onwards,

Katrina vanden Heuvel
Editorial Director and Publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x