Editorials & Other Articles

2018-03-17T18:34:20+00:00

Doug Jones, who got more than 90% of the black vote, voted for the Dodd Frank repeal that has a provision exempting most banks from reporting demographic data in mortgage lending that catches did discriminatory practices. This about a betrayal of black voters, but it could just as well be any constituency of the Democratic Party that doesn't have their own hedge fund or bank. There are not moderate, swing, or even conservative voters out there demanding that we give banks more rope to strangle us with, so spare me that tired argument. Yes, I know they Republicans are worse in that they ALL gladly vote for this kind of shit unlike the less that half of Democrats who do. However, betrayals like this depress voter enthusiasm and turnout and likely have a greater effect on the outcome of elections than Jill Stein or Russian internet trolls. The Democratic Party may have a blue wave in 2018, but it will be short lived if they gain a majority in either or both chambers and continue to collude with Republicans on economic issues like this. The party needs leadership that stops this indefensible behavior, these people need to be primaried out, or the party will be replaced--or worse, it will continue to enable an increasingly authoritarian, ignorant, and violent Republican Party. It is an indisputable fact that many banks treat their black customers unequally. The only reason we know this is that banks are required to report demographic data on most mortgage loans. That data is publicly available to anyone who wants to look at it. Among other things, the legislation passed by the Senate on Wednesday strips away for some banks the requirement to report the race, ethnicity and gender of their mortgage customers. Under the new proposal, only the largest banks will have to report demographic data, which means that it will be impossible to find out if the other banks discriminate. If the law passes, these banks will be able to deny black customers without fear of repercussion or lawsuits. The Democratic Party could have singled out that provision to the public and made a fuss. They could have called it racist (because it is racist), which would have made the legislation lose support . They could easily have refused to vote for this bill unless that specific provision was stripped away. Sen. Doug Jones from the state of Alabama voted for it. https://www.theroot.com/doug-jones-and-the-democratic-party-just-screwed-black-1823802570

Post removed Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:34 PM Mar 2018

Post removed

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Post removed (Original Post) Post removed Mar 2018 OP

Wrong shenmue Mar 2018 #1

hi shenmue, which part of the post is incorrect? MLAA Mar 2018 #5

#fakenews. stonecutter357 Mar 2018 #2

so there was no repeal of Dodd Frank? What has Sen. Warren been railing against? yurbud Mar 2018 #8

It makes me sick to my stomach that anyone, let alone Democrats voted to approve MLAA Mar 2018 #3

I don't know how I feel about that. bearsfootball516 Mar 2018 #4

ammunition with voters or big donors? Apparently banks greased some palms ahead of the vote... yurbud Mar 2018 #7

Think about it. Is there one voter who supports less regulation for banks? rgbecker Mar 2018 #6

Yes. Igel Mar 2018 #10

Go to the link in the OP, read the replies. TheSmarterDog Mar 2018 #9

Could Ruskies be infiltrating us? Pauldg47 Mar 2018 #11

Zero Democrats should have voted for this. Zero. nt Lucky Luciano Mar 2018 #12

shenmue

(38,605 posts)

1. Wrong

Reply to Post removed (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:36 PM

Mar 2018

MLAA

(19,800 posts)

5. hi shenmue, which part of the post is incorrect?

Reply to shenmue (Reply #1)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:39 PM

Mar 2018

stonecutter357

(13,060 posts)

2. #fakenews.

Reply to Post removed (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:37 PM

Mar 2018

yurbud

(39,405 posts)

8. so there was no repeal of Dodd Frank? What has Sen. Warren been railing against?

Reply to stonecutter357 (Reply #2)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 03:24 PM

Mar 2018

MLAA

(19,800 posts)

3. It makes me sick to my stomach that anyone, let alone Democrats voted to approve

Reply to Post removed (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:37 PM

Mar 2018

Letting banks hide inequality/racist policies and practices.

bearsfootball516

(6,732 posts)

4. I don't know how I feel about that.

Reply to Post removed (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:37 PM

Mar 2018

Jones was in an impossible situation. He's in a deep red state and his chances for winning re-election are slim. If he had voted against the repeal, it would have given plenty of ammunition to his opponent.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)

7. ammunition with voters or big donors? Apparently banks greased some palms ahead of the vote...

Reply to bearsfootball516 (Reply #4)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:54 PM

Mar 2018

In the 2016 election cycle, the list of the top recipients of contributions from commercial banks was dominated by Republicans such as Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Marco Rubio of Florida. So far in the 2018 cycle, Ms Heitkamp and Mr Donnelly are well out in front. Another five Democratic senators who supported the Crapo bill also appear in the top 20: Claire McCaskill (Missouri), Tim Kaine (Virginia), Jon Tester (Montana), Doug Jones (Alabama) and Mark Warner (Virginia), of which the latter three are members of the Senate banking committee.

https://www.ft.com/content/87df9624-178c-11e8-9376-4a6390addb44

rgbecker

(4,890 posts)

6. Think about it. Is there one voter who supports less regulation for banks?

Reply to Post removed (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 02:48 PM

Mar 2018

Except for a few bookkeepers, who might find the paper work less appealing than standing around a water cooler, who would possibly support less regulation, especially after the 2007/8 meltdown?

Oh, bankers and their owners who are standing by, ready to give thousands to candidates who support this shit.

Igel

(37,613 posts)

10. Yes.

Reply to rgbecker (Reply #6)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 04:49 PM

Mar 2018

Anybody who doesn't qualify for loans under the more strict loaning requirements.

Those end to be people and businesses with fewer assets, lower income, or shakier credit histories.

Do you know any kind of business or family known for fewer assets, lower income, or shakier credit histories?

The legislation is a sausage, like most legislation. It includes all kinds of things some people want. That can be interpreted as "for each thing there's a group of some people who want them" or "for each thing, there's a set of some people who want it"--with those "some people" not being the same for each thing. In other words, each provision has some supporters but pretty much nobody wants all the provisions.

TheSmarterDog

(794 posts)

9. Go to the link in the OP, read the replies.

Reply to Post removed (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 04:27 PM

Mar 2018

Learn about how much of this article is bullshit. e.g.:

Calvinballer- The score is still Q to 12
Michael Harriot
3/15/18 6:18pm

Anyone not blaming Republicans for this bill in the first place is only enabling that same GOP behavior. When you hold Democrats to account for what the GOP has wrought, you’re part of the problem.

Pauldg47

(644 posts)

11. Could Ruskies be infiltrating us?

Reply to TheSmarterDog (Reply #9)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 08:54 PM

Mar 2018

Lucky Luciano

(11,875 posts)

12. Zero Democrats should have voted for this. Zero. nt

Reply to TheSmarterDog (Reply #9)

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 09:06 PM

Mar 2018

Kick in to the DU tip jar?

This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.

As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.