"Senators Give Unanimous Support to Ending Too-Big-to-Fail Banks"

[Ted King]

Well, it's a non-binding resolution. We'll have to see if it actually progresses into passage of a real bill with real world consequences for banks (I hope it does because it REALLY needs to get done, but history makes me extremely skeptical):

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-25...-banks.htm

Senators voted 99-0 in support of a non-binding measure calling for an end to implicit subsidies the credit markets give banks over $500 billion because of the perception that the federal government would bail them out.

“The measure was non-binding, but it was an important step forward,” Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts and a critic of large banks, said in a statement. “I’m glad that Republicans and Democrats can agree: ‘too-big- to-fail’ needs to end and these big-bank subsidies make no sense.”

The amendment, sponsored by Senators David Vitter, a Republican from Louisiana, and Sherrod Brown, a Democrat from Ohio, is seen as an early gauge of support for a bill the two lawmakers said they will introduce next month to provide economic incentives for banks to reduce their size.

Brown said the goal of the legislation is to take way the “economic advantage the market gives” large banks and to reduce the risk they pose to the entire financial system. He said support for a too-big-to-fail bill has grown over the last 10 to 12 months.

“I’m confident that support is growing,” Brown said in a March 10 interview with Bloomberg Television. “I don’t know that we’ve got the 50 or maybe 60 votes we need yet.”
$500 Billion

The upcoming bill would impose additional capital requirements on the largest banks -- defined in the amendment as those with more than $500 billion in assets. The new capital rules would not include risk weights that “can be manipulated and gamed,” Vitter said in remarks on the Senate floor on Feb. 28.

Six U.S. banks have more than $500 billion in assets, including JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. (MS)

[cbelt3]

Interesting.

[Black]

Why am I having such a hard time getting past the first sentence?
Link no workee.

[hal]

If it ain't binding, it's a waste of time... might as well read the constitution again...

[(vikm)]

Black wrote:
Why am I having such a hard time getting past the first sentence?
Link no workee.

For the same reason that you and I can come to a non-binding agreement that I will send you $50 for each and every forum post made for the next year?

[Ted King]

Hmm. I don't know what happend to the link. Here is another try it getting it right:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-25...banks.html

[Black]

Ted King wrote:
Hmm. I don't know what happend to the link. Here is another try it getting it right:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-25...banks.html

Thanks... didn't know if it was a cut and paste error.

Senators voted 99-0 in support of a non-binding measure calling for an end to implicit subsidies the credit markets give banks over $500 billion because of the perception that the federal government would bail them out.

[SteveG]

The huge banks reply to folks who think this resolution meant something.