S.3217 - Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010

To promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail," to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes. view all titles (26)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail," to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Official: A original bill to promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail", to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Private Fund Investment Advisers Registration Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Bank and Savings Association Holding Company and Depository Institution Regulatory Improvements Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Bank and Savings Association Holding Company and Depository Institution Regulatory Improvements Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Enhancing Financial Institution Safety and Soundness Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Financial Stability Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Improving Access to Mainstream Financial Institutions Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Office of National Insurance Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Over-the-Counter Derivatives Markets Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Enhancing Financial Institution Safety and Soundness Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Financial Stability Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Improving Access to Mainstream Financial Institutions Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Office of National Insurance Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Over-the-Counter Derivatives Markets Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Private Fund Investment Advisers Registration Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • Official: An original bill to promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail", to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes. as introduced.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 66 total comments.

Spam Comment

SmilingAhab 01/27/2011 3:12pm
in reply to christinemont Apr 28, 2010 7:20am

And thanks to that government takeover, I have healthcare at a reasonable rate instead of the insurance racket calling my ADHD a pre-existing condition and a school loan with a single-digit interest rate instead of 30-something percent.

juryrocket 06/18/2010 2:21pm

The very same people who helped push risky and “affordable” housing, didn’t see the bursting bubble coming at all, and have no respect or appreciation for free markets and businesses that operate therein are now going to redesign our financial system? Okay, what’s next? Tiger Woods becomes a marriage counselor? The cast of the Jersey Shore start a book club? Keith Olbermann becomes the featured speaker on the anger management tour? Here’s the real definitive guide to financial reform:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvabFm-cE9c

djezell 06/10/2010 7:43am
in reply to djezell Jun 10, 2010 5:13am

S.Amdt. 3932 withdrawn. Win. One less thing to worry about for now.

djezell 06/10/2010 5:13am

Nay on the Durbin Interchange amendment. Government regulation of interchange rates is not the solution in my opinion, but certainly not in this manner. Big companies like BP get to pocket the money they would normally spend on swipe charges, while the banks get stuck with the bill? Don’t be angry when the banks, in turn, slap the fees onto you as a consumer to make up the difference. Curbing people from using cards over cash to begin with doesnt sound good to me. If people use cash more often, then will have to carry more cash on them. More cash in wallets equals less cash in the bank. Less cash in the bank equals higher interest rates or service charges to make up for the difference. The less money the banks have to loan, the more interest rates will be for lending. Supply and demand.

LucasFoxx 06/08/2010 8:52pm
in reply to btd May 21, 2010 7:37am

That was my point. As you say, the gov’t (tries to) legislate ethics. Yet, as you notice, they can’t stop racism, poverty, terrorism, ignorance, nor …homicide.

I liked Glass-Steagall. And I agree: credit ratings need to be addressed.

dr0b3rts 05/29/2010 9:48pm
in reply to Marv63095 Apr 16, 2010 1:29pm

Independent consumer watchdog = good.
Ran by the government (controlled by special interests) = bad.

flower 05/25/2010 1:06pm
in reply to pramsey Apr 19, 2010 6:02am

we need the transparency in the FEDERAL reserve, they have been printing money like crazy these past few years and nobody knows where is it all going. What congress is trying to do is to let us know where our tax money is pocketed.

dragonflylover 05/24/2010 10:13am

In your mind Greed is not a crime, but in the BIBLE that republicans use to convience us that government is a bad thing, it does claim that GREED is a sin! The same as a crime! Right? So when things are intentionally hid from the people that are paying into it, that in your mind is not a sin (crime)? WOW! REPUBLICAN FREEDOMS SUCK! and maybe back in the day free men could be trusted, However with the growing population how can ANYONE claim we don’t need OVERSEERS? With all the dope heads, alcoholics, child molesters, racists, common crooks and the list goes on and on and on how can a sane adult still deny we need overseers

tlfmd 05/22/2010 5:09pm

Teeth, give it TEETH or forget it.
A pansy bill would be worse than USELESS. It would prevent adoption of a good bill.
The fools with the money have all the reason in the world to ensure their exclusion from regulation or penalty. After all, they have the money to buy the vote they need.
By the way, they are the face of the recent disaster, where the rubber met the road.

btd 05/21/2010 7:37am
in reply to AustinHowe May 17, 2010 7:19am

Glass-Steagall would be fine in my mind. But credit rating agencies are a must. And from what I’ve read, this doesn’t even touch them!

We’re in a marketing driven economy (push) not a market driven economy (pull). Until people wise up, they are screwed.

And LucasFoxx, the gov’t legislates ethics all the time (Civil Rights Act, Community Reinvestment Act, Medicare, Social Security, War on Terror, the Dept of Education, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell… The question is whether it’s effective or not. Racists, poor old people, terrorists, and ignorance still abound.

uncleray 05/21/2010 4:27am

The bureaucracy did not catch the problem earlier
so adding a layer seems pointless.
Bring Back Glass Steagall!!!

vlobato9817 05/20/2010 4:47pm

and the federal government grows exponentially with more bureaucracies and red tape.

mazdastuff 05/17/2010 4:46pm

I didn’t see anything about fannie or freddie. Hey Dodd, you missed the biggest theft system supported by democrats. anything in there about not allowing government to dictate the lending rules for low income, high risk individuals…nope, did not see that either.

AustinHowe 05/17/2010 7:19am
in reply to nmeagent May 01, 2010 10:49pm

You apparently are missing that there is a difference between greed, and running the economy of an entire nation and possibly the world into the ground. It happened. The purpose of this legislation is to prevent such occurences, although again, I maintain that a re-instatement of Glass-Steagall would be just fine.

AustinHowe 05/17/2010 6:53am

I support the bill, but I still think that a simple reinstatement of the Glass Steagall act could almost singularly solve the problem.

ctraveler_22 05/07/2010 1:48pm

Does this bill still allow banks to invest in derivatives from other banks? I think this bill may not go to the root cause of the problem, the reason I say this is because small regional banks that worked like ideal banks, meaning they only borrowed from fed and other banks, they did not resell their loans but kept them in their books, failed. They have failed because the people have also failed and they did not have proper insurance in their book (basic derivatives). Large banks almost went under for investing so much on the derivatives market which can collapse the system. There should be some type of derivatives market that average investors, and banks can invest which would could be used in the event that defaults occur but a market with more liquidity similar to the options market. Such market could help ease lending again allow people to invest in small scale which in term would help everyone borrow, and it can help over all economy more than current stock market.

justamick 05/04/2010 6:12am
in reply to moattorney Apr 29, 2010 5:12pm

:) You didnt read what I said.

Moreover, I was actually referring to a specific provision within the proposed legislation itself.

If you actually read what was said you would actually understand what the true point of my statement was.

So please, dont try to make off the wall comments that do not relate to what I was highlighting in this bill.

nmeagent 05/02/2010 6:01pm
in reply to LucasFoxx May 02, 2010 1:12pm

Alright, this is definitely going nowhere. I like that it has somehow become my greed. ;)

LucasFoxx 05/02/2010 1:12pm
in reply to nmeagent May 01, 2010 10:49pm

As I said, ”there is no way to completely protect yourself from the greed of other people.” You can’t legislate ethics, but the reason we have what consumer protections there are, is because more than “50.1%” of the time, more than “50.1%” of American voters decided they wanted protection from your greed. Furthermore, IMHO, no candidate will ever reach a higher office than the House of Representatives on a platform of “unbridled capitalism.“ Good luck with your campaign.

nmeagent 05/01/2010 10:49pm
in reply to LucasFoxx May 01, 2010 11:50am

It is merely a matter of motivation. You seem to suggest that we can and should somehow correct this perceived widespread greed with federal legislation such as this bill. Greed is not a justification for coercive legislation any more than having a surly demeanor. Greed alone is not and should not be a crime.

LucasFoxx 05/01/2010 11:50am
in reply to nmeagent May 01, 2010 8:50am

Greed is an issue of ethics and morality. You seem to be implying that greed is good.

nmeagent 05/01/2010 8:50am
in reply to LucasFoxx Apr 30, 2010 6:25pm

You insinuate this with nearly every comment you make on the subject.

LucasFoxx 04/30/2010 6:25pm
in reply to nmeagent Apr 30, 2010 3:02pm

“Greed is not a crime.” – I didn’t say that either.

nmeagent 04/30/2010 3:30pm
in reply to moattorney Apr 29, 2010 5:20pm

“So when Reagan, GHW Bush, Clinton, and G Bush said that they were deregulating the financial industry, all four of them were lying?”

If you believe they mean nearly total deregulation as suggested by the rest of your comment, then yes, they were lying. Otherwise, no, though without something very close to the previous definition your comment doesn’t make any damn sense.

“Strong government involvement in financial markets begain circa 1933”

Most of it, yes. Of course that depends on what you mean by “strong”; I would argue that strong involvement began with the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 or perhaps with fixing the relative value of gold to silver in the mid 19th century.

“And don’t try blaming the CRA.”

I blame the moral hazard created by past and present government interference in the private sector.

nmeagent 04/30/2010 3:02pm
in reply to LucasFoxx Apr 28, 2010 8:21pm

“I will say that I’ve never understood greed.”

Greed is not a crime. If you believe someone is greedy and don’t wish to do business with them, more power to you. Do not, however, convince the government to steal from some individual or group simply because you believe they are greedy. Stick to punishing actual crimes such as the many fraud statutes already on the books instead of inventing new subjective thought crimes.

“a fair day’s wage”

Who decides what is fair, you? 50.1% of the population? If I get enough people together with this goal, can I justifiably confiscate your property? Does it help if I come to the conclusion that you’re somehow greedy?

“Homicide is heavily regulated, but…”

You’re actually making this comparison? Unbelievable…

moattorney 04/29/2010 5:20pm
in reply to nmeagent Apr 27, 2010 3:39pm

So when Reagan, GHW Bush, Clinton, and G Bush said that they were deregulating the financial industry, all four of them were lying?
The government hasn’t been heavily “screw around” with finanical markets for over a century. Strong government involvement in financial markets begain circa 1933, and began to wane circa 1981. In the 1800’s, we had financial crises (and resulting severe recessions) once a decade or so. From `1933 to 1981, no systemic financial crises. After Reagan, Savings and Loan Crisis, Long-Term Capital Managment, Enron, and now the CDO/Derivatives/Prime Mortage Crisis.
And don’t try blaming the CRA. The overwhelming majority of subprime loans were made by private mortgage companies like Countrywide which were not subject to the CRA.

moattorney 04/29/2010 5:12pm
in reply to justamick Apr 23, 2010 6:19am

Typically, when the SEC has forced open, transparent exchanges for financal products, the transactional costs for consumers go down, not up. The SEC made NYSE open up to electronic trading, which allowed E-Trade and others to compete against Wall Street firms who complained about the changes cutting into their profits. Transparency and open markets, as opposed to secret deals, should make derivatives and swaps cheaper as well.

moattorney 04/29/2010 5:02pm
in reply to deborahg6 Apr 21, 2010 6:22pm

The idea that Congress can just pass a bill to end bailouts is a pipe dream. If H. Paulson, a free market fundamentalist like yourself, thought that he was about to watch the entire financial system sink into the abyss and take the whole economy with it, and he couldn’t say, “Let them fail and let the chips fall where they may” no one else is going to do it either. Not after we let the banks fail during the Great Depression and we know what that led to.
TARP required an act of congress. Any bill passed to outlaw bailing out banks can and will be repealed and replaced by later congresses faced with an apparent meltdown of the financial system.

LucasFoxx 04/28/2010 8:21pm
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to nmeagent Apr 27, 2010 3:39pm

I have no answer for the enemy agent. That is a mischaracterization of my comment.

I will say that I’ve never understood greed. All I know is a hard day’s work and trying to get a fair day’s wage. Money is required for survival, but it is just sport or a video game to some. The goal seems to be to simply grab all the coins you see. Ultimately, there is no way to completely protect yourself from the greed of other people. You just do what you can. Homicide is heavily regulated, but it hasn’t stopped people from finding new ways to kill people; intently or not. But you do what you can. Yes, there are probably fewer ways to rob people legally than illegally, but there are still a lot of fine ways to make a ton of cash deceiving people that are technically, perfectly, legal. After all, they say, “it’s not illegal until you get caught.”


Vote on This Bill

31% Users Support Bill

165 in favor / 362 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments