It Goes Back to Clinton

Today we found ourselves in the midst of a major economic crisis with banks and insurance companies failing and the government pumping massive amounts of money into these corporations to the tune of $11.6 trillion dollars and growing. Many people are asking themselves, what went wrong, how could this have happened.

Obviously, as Obama has yet to complete his first six months in office we can hardly blame him for everything. Many people feel that Bush is at fault due to his obvious ties to big business, his questionable actions in regards to domestic security and his all around poor administration, however, we must go back to 1999 to see where this started.

On November 12, 1999 congress enacted a bill proposed by then President Bill Clinton. This act was called the Financial Services Modernization Act or the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999.

What this act did was to effectively repeal part the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 which was part of the New Deal, the famous plan to help pull the US out of the Depression of the 1930s. One thing the Glass-Steagal Act did was create the FDIC to help insure people's deposits in banks, however the part that was repealed prohibited a bank's holding company from owning other financial institutions.

In essence, this act made it legal for commercial and investment banks to consolidate creating what we know now as The Financial Services Industry. This consolidation was illegal under the Glass-Steagal Act. One of the major motivations behind this act was permanently legalizing the merger of Citibank, a commercial bank, and Traveler's Group, which was an insurance company. This questionably legal merger created the massive conglomerate known as Citigroup.

Citigroup, as we all know, is now being bailed out by the US taxpayer. Citigroup was, at one time, the largest and most profitable business in the world.

I find it interesting that we find ourselves in the situation we do, that of facing another major economic depression, due almost directly to the repealing of an act made during the last great depression that sought to prohibit massive financial conglomerates. Especially when the failure and mismanagement of these massive conglomerates are one of the major issues behind our current depression.

This gives more credence to the idea that our current woes were not unforeseen and may have, in fact, been planned. It almost brings to mind the old saying "If we do not remember the past, we are doomed to repeat it." It seems we have forgotten our fairly recent history and are now in the middle of reliving it.

EDIT:Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act

Glass-Steagall Act

[edit on 22-3-2009 by Shadowflux]

On November 12, 1999 congress enacted a bill proposed by then President Bill Clinton. This act was called the Financial Services Modernization Act or the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999.

This is misleading. Clinton did not propose the act, senators Gramm, Leach and Bliley proposed it. Clinton signed it, as the President is obliged to do when an act has been voted on by the Senate.

Source
The bills were introduced in the U.S. Senate by Phil Gramm (R-Texas) and in the U.S. House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa). The third lawmaker associated with the bill was Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R-Virginia), Chairman of the House Commerce Committee from 1995 to 2001. On May 6, 1999, the Senate passed the bills by a 54-44 vote along party lines (53 Republicans and one Democrat in favor; 44 Democrats opposed)

[edit on 3/22/2009 by mythatsabigprobe]

reply to post by mythatsabigprobe


I suppose you are correct. I'm not trying to crucify Clinton, there's really little point in that at this time. The main point I was trying to get across is that some of the roots of our current problem go back all the way to 1999 and earlier.

Namely that an act was signed in 1999 that repealed an older act from the Great Depression, an act which sought to curtail the conglomeration of financial institutions lest we find ourselves in another Depression. Incidentally, we find our selves in another Depression due to the failings of massive financial conglomerates.

I also thought it was of note due to the prominence of the creation of Citigroup as one of the motivating factors behind this bill. Citigroup is one of the major companies being bailed out by the tax payers.

If you asked me, this act should probably have not been created

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Clinton signed it, as the President is obliged to do when an act has been voted on by the Senate.

1.A bill becomes law if signed by the President or if not signed within 10 days and Congress is in session.
2.If Congress adjourns before the 10 days and the President has not signed the bill then it does not become law ("Pocket Veto.")
3.If the President vetoes the bill it is sent back to Congress with a note listing his/her reasons. The chamber that originated the legislation can attempt to override the veto by a vote of two-thirds of those present. If the veto of the bill is overridden in both chambers then it becomes law.

www.votesmart.org...

not obliged to sign it but his veto can be overturned by both houses and, since they already passed it once, in theory, they would vote again to overturn the veto.

reply to post by Shadowflux


Nice to see this post...I worked for one of the U.S. oldest financially sound brokerage firms back in 2000, shortly after this legislation took hold. The summer of 2000, they were bought in a amicable takeover, and and became part of an international banking conglomerate based in Switzerland.

I will never forget the day before it hit public knowledge. I have never seen so many people compromise themselves at once. Insider info led to massive employee stock purchase days before it was official (bookies). It felt as if I was living a movie, surreal.

Everyone knew what it represented. What once was seperarated and regulated became legal...everyone who worked there knew how it would turn out. We would eventually be here today. They sold us out....our own corrupt complicit senate and congress...and Bill was as complicit...look where he is today.

Traitors.

Then immedialtly, there came the audits....they "found" nothing. There were thousands of "Marha Stewarts" and the SEC never gave it a second look.

Star and Flag my friend!