« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
After Lobbying From Stanford, Senate Killed Bill To Combat Financial Fraud
A great catch on Stanford by Lindsay Renick Mayer of the Center for Responsive Politics.
To summarize: The cycle during which the Stanford Financial Group gave the most in political contributions was 2001-2002. That may have been because, at that time, Congress was debating the Financial Services Antifraud Network Act, which, according to CRP, would have "created a computer network linking the databases of state and federal banking, securities and insurance regulators to curb financial fraud."
That bill ended up passing the House, but not the Senate. And according to lobbying reports, says Renick Mayer, Stanford Financial Group lobbied on the bill. (It's not hard to guess their position.)
During that same cycle, Renick Mayer continues, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee took in more than $800,000 from the firm. At the time, the DSCC was chaired by Florida Democratic senator Bill Nelson. And Nelson is the current member of Congress who has received more campaign cash from Stanford and its employees than any other, raking in $45,900.
Leaving Nelson aside, could that 2002 bill to combat financial fraud, which died in the Senate after lobbying from Stanford, have helped authorities uncover the firm's alleged fraud much sooner? Seems worth asking...
Josh
Zachary
What was Cornyn's vote on the bill?
February 17, 2009 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
as Gomer Pyle used to say
Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!
Isn't it easier just to assume that every corporate entity out there is busy trying to undermine every single Pro People bit of legislation, and buying politicians to gain every bit of Pro Corporate legislation?
Isn't it just easier to assume they have been chiseling, undermining, blowing up, beating down, and strangling EVERY single instance of oversight or regulation?
That is how I operate. And still I can be shocked and awed. I don't know all the different mechanisms, all the oversight institutions, so quite often I hear about a new one, and usually at the same time I learn that some Corporo-Republican entity has been gaming it. I am not surprised to learn they have been gaming it, but I quite often get taken aback that there was a Whole 'Nother arena that was being totally dominated by greasy backdoor corporate pillagers, ones I had never heard or dreamed of. It never ends.
Please, I am not naive. I am not a sap. I have been quite fatalistic, or at least realistic about this for a long long time. But these folks spend millions and millions of dollars so they can steal billions upon billions. Then they get billions upon 100 billions of Go Away Bailout money instead of being thrown in jail.
These people (although they are actually just the OPERATORS of huge semi-human CorporoMachines)...these people have 3 shifts of lawyers and lobbyist, working 24/7 on how to MINE us and our govt. and our wealth and our people. There is more effort going into their massive larceny schemes than all the world wars and other collaborative human endeavors combined. And this is being pitted against our efforts as single individuals who get together every 4 years and try to throw our little piece of paper at the Dragon.
I do not wish to propose bloodshed, but what else will stop them? They spend a lot of their loot demonizing US! Claiming gays, and welfare moms and hollywood artists are screwing the world up beyond redemption, while they tear it apart (literally) with their machines and their machinations.
February 17, 2009 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Honestly, Stanford galls me a whole lot less than Madoff.
Stanford based his companies in Antigua and Barbuda, a country that, until recently had money laundering problems. Big problems.
But that's not my point.
Stanford was operating offshore. Just like UBS and others were operating offshore. His clients were those of "high net worth." Probably many of those clients of "high net worth" were Americans seeking to avoid taxes by offshoring their wealth. Which is, of course, illegal.
To those American investors who lose out - shame on you. You should'a known.
February 17, 2009 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look I get that... money.... vote.. but I have to be skeptical when you don't finish connecting the dots. I see the mud, I see it on the wall but why not one line on the link?
DID Florida Democratic senator Bill Nelson vote against the "Financial Services Antifraud Network Act"? One brief sentence more is all that is needed.
If you want to add to that:
DID any (and which ones) of the member on the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee vote to defeat it?
How did the Senate as a whole vote?
Was there a partisan split on Senate votes on that?
February 18, 2009 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink