IBJNews

Historic financial overhaul signed into law by Obama

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Reveling over a new milestone in his presidency, a triumphant Barack Obama on Wednesday signed into law the most sweeping overhaul of lending and high-finance rules since the Great Depression, adding safeguards for millions of consumers and aiming to restrain Wall Street excesses that could set off a new recession.

The president's signing ceremony capped nearly two years of intense and partisan debate over how to avoid a recurrence of the 2008 financial meltdown that buckled the U.S. economy and left sharp, lasting imprints on the nation's politics and in Americans' homes.

"Because of this law, the American people will never be asked again to foot the bill for Wall Street's mistakes," Obama said.

In a heated midterm election season that has dented his public support, Obama sought to put the complex law in pocketbook terms. Emphasizing provisions that guard borrowers from abusive lenders, he claimed "the strongest financial protections for consumers in the nation's history."

Not everyone agreed. Republicans portrayed the bill as a burden on small banks and the businesses that rely on them and argued that it will cost consumers and impede job growth.

Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, a member of the House GOP leadership, on Wednesday joined House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio in calling for the law's repeal.

The law, passed despite nearly unanimous Republican opposition, attempts to catch up to a financial system that has sped ahead of outdated regulation and slackened rules that allowed banks, traders and others to take increased risks.

Wall Street's near collapse, Obama said, "was a crisis born of a failure of responsibility from certain corners of Wall Street to the halls of power in Washington."

The new rules, however, are only at a midpoint. Banking and market regulators will have up to two years to write many of the new regulations required by the law, extending uncertainty and ushering in a new phase of lobbying by financial firms.

"Regulators will have to be vigilant," Obama said.

The president sought to quell public anger over the $700 billion bank rescue fund the government created at the height of the crisis to reassure the markets. While the infusion is credited with providing stability, the public recoiled at the idea of taxpayer money being used to help prop up huge banks.

The law gives regulators new authority to liquidate large, interconnected financial firms that are failing.

. "There will be no more tax-funded bailouts, period."

The law, however, does permit the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to borrow taxpayer money from the Treasury temporarily to help cover the costs of winding down a large firm. Other large banks would have to pay the Treasury back over time.

Firms have been poring over the massive bill, anxious to assess its most immediate impact. Credit rating firms, for instance, say they will no longer allow the issuers of debt-backed securities to put their ratings for them in public sale documents, wary of a provision in the law that makes it easier to sue ratings agencies.

The law assembles an influential council of regulators to be on the lookout for risks across the finance system. It also crates a powerful independent consumer financial protection bureau within the Federal Reserve to write and enforce new regulations covering lending and credit.

It places shadow financial markets that previously escaped the oversight of regulators under new scrutiny and gives the government new powers to break up companies that threaten the economy.

Major Wall Street banks have welcomed some provisions in the bill but have fiercely opposed others that would limit their banking business and cut into their profitability.

And Republicans have argued that the law will hurt rather than help people still reeling from the recession .

"Millions of Americans are struggling to find jobs, and yet all they see in Washington are Democrats passing massive bills that, at their core, seem to have one thing in common: more job loss," Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said on the Senate floor Wednesday.

Thomas Donohue, the president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, called the law "a financial regulatory boondoggle."

The new law comes at a politically delicate time for the president. A growing number of business leaders describe his administration as antagonistic to their interests, and polls show the American public increasingly wary of his policy initiatives.

Eager to portray the law as one with broad appeal, the White House included some top bankers among those at the bill signing ceremony. They included Vikram Pandit, CEO of the financial giant Citigroup, and top executives from Bank of New York Mellon and Barclay's PLC. Noticeably absent, however, were JPMorgan Chase & Co. CEO Jamie Dimon, a past Obama backer, and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein. Dimon has been vocal in his criticism of some provisions in the bill.

"The CEOs who opposed reform never expected to be invited to the bill signing, and not a single one has complained to the administration," Deputy Communications Director Jen Psaki wrote in a White House web log Wednesday.

Also in the audience were Maryland Vietnam veteran, Andrew Giordano, who was hit with bank overdraft fees, and Robin Fox, a Georgia teacher stung by retroactive interest rate increases on her credit card balance — two issues the legislation aims to remedy.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker and Elizabeth Warren, head of the panel assigned to oversee the bank bailout fund, also attended. Both have been instrumental in shaping parts of the bill.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • get a job
    I hope Pence loses his job and gets a feel of what it would be like to try to feed his family with no income
  • Pence does not care about the law
    He just wants to go against President Obama.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. what Steve is doing and if he is on another radio station. That is the station I will listen to.

  2. From the story: "The city of Indianapolis also will consider tax incentives and funding for infrastructure required for the project, according to IEDC." Why would the City need to consider additional tax incentives when Lowe's has already bought the land and reached an agreement with IEDC to bring the jobs? What that tells me is that the City has already pledged the incentives, unofficially, and they just haven't had time to push it through the MDC yet. Either way, subsidizing $10/hour jobs is going to do nothing toward furthering the Mayor's stated goal of attracting middle and upper-middle class residents to Marion County.

  3. Ron Spencer and the entire staff of Theater on the Square embraced IndyFringe when it came to Mass Ave in 2005. TOTS was not only a venue but Ron and his friends created, presented and appeared in shows which embraced the 'spirit of the fringe'. He's weathered all the storms and kept smiling ... bon voyage and thank you.

  4. Not sure how many sushi restaurants are enough, but there are three that I know of in various parts of downtown proper and all are pretty good.

  5. Rick, how does granting theright to marry to people choosing to marry same-sex partners harm the lives of those who choose not to? I cannot for the life of me see any harm to people who choose not to marry someone of the same sex. We understand your choice to take the parts of the bible literally in your life. That is fine but why force your religious beliefs on others? I'm hoping the judges do the right thing and declare the ban unconstitutional so all citizens of Wisconsin and Indiana have the same marriage rights and that those who chose someone of the same sex do not have less rights than others.

ADVERTISEMENT