"Ouroboros Rex" > wrote in message
...
> SteveT wrote:
>> "Ouroboros Rex" > wrote in message
>> >...
>>> SW2 1999 wrote:
>> <snip>
>> FWIW, I was on the side of the Dems -- I don't think
>> it's up to government or agencies thereof to impose such arbitrary
>> regulation but rather up to the parties to such arrangements to
>> recognize the dangers; government's role should be limited to
>> providing legal frameworks for enforcing contracts and adding to
>> information to facilitate informed participation.
>
> In fact, it was republican deregulation that brought the situation about.
>
> Phil Gramm slipped the Commodities Futures Modernization Act
> into a 2000 omnibus bill at the last minute, and Bush and Co. passed the
> American Dream Downpayment Initiative in 2003.
>
> http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=20...e_disaster.htm
> "...Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, Congress has been passing
> laws in an effort to correct problems caused by the flawed monetary
> system.
> But that all changed in 1999 when lobbyists wrote the "Commodity Futures
> Modernization Act" and gave it to lawmakers for consideration.
>
> The bill had little chance of a hearing, but while the Republican Congress
> was deadlocked with the Democrats in an effort to pass a budget, the Act
> was
> slipped into a budget compromise. Sponsored by Rep. Thomas Ewing [R-IL]
> and
> cosponsored by Rep. Tom Bliley (R-VA) Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX) Rep. John
> LaFalce (D-NY) Rep. James Leach (R-IA) the bill went to the Senate without
> debate.
>
> The budget compromise later went to the Senate and then to President Bill
> Clinton for his signature. The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
> was signed into law on December 21, 2000. The purpose was to allow new
> financial products called swaps to be unregulated. Neither the SEC nor he
> Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) would be able to regulate
> them."
>
> http://www.hud.gov/news/release.cfm?...t=pr03-140.cfm
>
> "Today we are taking action to bring many thousands of Americans closer to
> the great goal of owning a home," said President Bush. "These funds will
> help American families achieve their goals, strengthen our communities,
> and
> our entire nation."
>
> <snip>
You're seem very skilled at selecting from among the facts those you
wish to present, far more than I have been so far!
<grin> Since there are
almost always two sides to every story, you are at least partly correct:
From
http://www.usatoday.com/money/econom...meltdown_N.htm
[noting, parenthetically, that _USA Today_ is far from being a right-leaning
journal]:
<snip>
"The bill barring most regulation of derivative trading was inserted into an
11,000-page budget measure that became law as the nation was focused on the
disputed 2000 presidential election. It was sponsored by Republican Sens.
Phil Gramm of Texas and Richard Lugar of Indiana - with support from
Democrats, the Clinton administration and then-Federal Reserve chairman Alan
Greenspan. Few opposed it.
"Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat who help negotiate the bill for
Democrats, says he put aside his qualms because Wall Street and Greenspan
were adamant that less regulation would help the stock market.
<snip>
"A bill barring derivatives from being regulated as futures contracts passed
the House in October 2000, by a vote of 377-4.
<snip>
"2. Protecting Fannie, Freddie
"In 2005, Congress rejected a Republican-sponsored bill aimed at curbing
risky investments by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, thanks to
resistance from mostly Democrats. It was the latest in a string of
unsuccessful attempts to rein in the two agencies. In this case, Congress
ignored Greenspan's warning about the financial risks Fannie and Freddie
were taking on."
For more complete (and unfiltered) thoughts, also see hits at
http://www.goodsearch.com/search.asp...+regulation%29.
And always take anything you read with at least a modicum of NaCl.