Will Elizabeth Warren Oppose Obama's Pick for Banking Watchdog?

[n2doc]

The president has just nominated a Wall Street lawyer to head a key banking regulator.
—By Erika Eichelberger


In December, President Barack Obama nominated attorney Sharon Bowen to help run the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which regulates derivatives and futures markets. Bowen has little experience in derivatives, and she has represented big banks in court. Financial-reform advocates are skeptical that she is the right woman for the job—and are trying to generate opposition to the nominee. But the real question is this: Will middle-class crusader Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) oppose Bowen's confirmation? And if she did, would that derail Bowen's candidacy?

If Warren—who sits on the powerful Senate banking committee, which vets CFTC nominees—signals she will vote against Bowen, other key senators on the committee may follow suit, and that could cause a problem for the White House and Bowen. There's precedent for this. In September, Warren's no-vote threat helped scuttle the nomination of former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, whom Obama was considering as chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Warren has weighed in on Obama's CFTC picks before. In November, she expressed skepticism about Timothy Massad, the Treasury Department official Obama tapped to be chair of the agency, saying she needs more information about Massad's views on regulation and his qualifications for the post. (Massad has not yet been confirmed by the Senate.)

Warren has declined to comment on Bowen's nomination. But there's reason to suspect she may not approve of this pick. In late November, the Massachusetts senator and eight other Senate Dems, including Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Jeff Merkley of Oregon, sent a letter to Obama urging him to nominate CFTC commissioners who have "demonstrated experience in futures, options and swaps markets" and who possess "the expertise, independence and track record necessary to…provide long overdue oversight to the swap and derivative markets that pose a systemic risk to our economy." In the same letter, the senators expressed concern that if hard-nosed reformers are not nominated to vacant CFTC posts, Wall Street may have more influence at the agency. "We are deeply concerned that some industry interests may view [these nominations] as opportunities to roll back or slow down essential reforms," Warren and her colleagues wrote.

more

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/12/will-elizabeth-warren-support-obamas-pick-banking-watchdog

[Laelth]

1. It will be interesting to see what she does. n/t

-Laelth

[MannyGoldstein]

2. I think Wall Street deserves a voice in this, too

It's only fair. Sen. Warren goes too far.

Sincerely yours,

Wall Street

[Clyde Tenson]

4. I second the motion...

There's never enough foxes in the hen house.

[zeemike]

5. Who is better to watch for foxes that a fox?

At least that is their argument...as if the fox does not agree with the objective of other foxes.
And welcome to DU.

[Enthusiast]

7. It's a bullshit argument and they know it.

Criminal fucks.

[DhhD]

3. Take control Senator Warren. Obama's Lame Duckness just set in.

[Dustlawyer]

6. It won't matter whether she does or doesn't, a Wall Street friendly person will be put there!

[Swede Atlanta]

8. Wall Street bought and paid for this president.....

He is doing their bidding by nominating Ms. Bowen.

As much good as BO has done, I voted for him twice and would again faced with the alternative, there are areas where his policies and personal differ little from those of his predecessor. We can only look at the NSA and Treasury to see this.

[1StrongBlackMan]

9. Why do people act ...

as though every job, anyone has taken is some statement of their philosophy?

Most people are offered and take jobs because of their ability to do that job. The fact is, people take jobs and do what their bosses tell them to do. (I know ... this is just another more evidence that the Obama Administration is just so corporatist.)

I have used this analogy before, and it still applies ... according to many here, the Denver Broncos should have never considered Peyton Manning because he was a great Quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts.

And, BTW, according to the DU standard, Elizabeth Warren should be forever an unspoken name because she once worked at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft ... a law firm that was heavily involved in the MBS industry, and worse, she was once a REPUBLICAN!

See how silly that sounds?

[grantcart]

10. To answer your question

In order to maintain a constant level of high outrage it is essential to reduce actors to a binary Manicheistic world view.

To add to your point let me add some additional names:

Wendall Potter, a former health insurance exec

Jeffrey Wigand, a former cigarette executive

Frank Schaeffer, a former Evangelistic leader of a right wing religious group.

Gary Gensler, chairman of the CFTC, a former Wall Street derivatives expert, now major reformer.

I don't know anything about the candidate in question, except that as an African American woman she would provide a radical departure from the old boys network and that's why I am curious about Dr. Warren's comments even though she is, as you rightfully point out she was a right wing lawyer from OK.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/24/elizabeth-warren-i-created-occupy-wall-street.html

“I was a Republican because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets. I think that is not true anymore,” Warren says. “I was a Republican at a time when I felt like there was a problem that the markets were under a lot more strain. It worried me whether or not the government played too activist a role.”

. . .

Warren adds that she voted for both Republicans and Democrats and thought that neither party deserved to dominate. “There should be some Republicans and some Democrats,” she says. Brown’s campaign could make the same point. In a state dominated by Democrats, it might help to have a Republican providing some healthy opposition.

Here is what we know about the President's appointments so far:

Since the passage of Dodd-Frank in 2010, the C.F.T.C. has put in place dozens of generally sound new federal rules — on transparency and oversight — against nearly impossible odds, including relentless lobbying by big banks resisting regulation and severe Republican-driven budget shortfalls that have required tireless work from a skeletal staff. Though much work remains, credit for the progress that has been made largely goes to the commission’s chairman, Gary Gensler, a Wall Street derivatives expert-turned-reformer, chosen by President Obama in 2009, and Commissioner Bart Chilton, a Democrat and a firm reform advocate, chosen by President George W. Bush in 2007 and renominated by Mr. Obama in 2009.

I give Dr. Warren's opinion a lot of weight and I know that she is unlikely to make her mind up on anything as superficial as her past employment, which as the examples above show, can be rather deceiving.

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. Hell ...

I'm gonna go there ...

And the "Liberal" high mark, Franklin D. Roosevelt, would/should have been written off because he came from a land speculating, drug trafficking .001% family and was clearly a war-monger, as he served as the Asst. Sec. of the Navy.

And let's not even talk about Earl Warren!

This obsession with past employment/affiliations is beyond silly.