The big question on the Republican side in the financial reform debate earlier today was Bob Corker, and whether he's playing an Olympia Snowesque role in holding out his potential support for a financial reform package in an effort to derail it or water it down, or if he's being an honest broker in an effort to find a decent medium ground. By the end of the day, that question was pretty much answered.
After Mitch McConnell's Frank Luntz-scripted hissy fits of the last two days, Corker has emerged as the voice of reason, telling his colleagues to "act like adults."
Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said on Thursday that he's been urging his GOP colleagues to be more cautious in the rhetoric they use to describe the Wall Street reform bill. Asked by a reporter if Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)'s recent sharply critical comments are harmful to the effort to reach a bipartisan deal, Corker said he hadn't heard McConnell's specific remarks, but advised his colleagues to "act like adults."
"Yesterday, I was on the Senate floor with Mark Warner. Apparently some things were said," Corker said in reference to McConnell's floor speech. "I think this is a bill where that's not necessary and that there are some differences, but adults can work 'em out. Let's act like adults and work 'em out, but let's do it in a real bipartisan way."
In a fairly long interview with Ezra, Corker does sound like the voice of reason, specifically on the overheated McConnell charge of the bill being a "permanent bailout."
Was Sen. Mitch McConnell correct? Is the Dodd bill, as currently written, a permanent bailout?
I've cautioned against hyperbole. But the fact is that the bill as it now is written allows numerous loopholes that allow a situation where you could have bailouts in perpetuity. It's a fair statement. This all happened after Mark [Warner] and I finished our work but my negotiations with Dodd ceased. Treasury and FDIC became involved and there are provisions that have been added that change the effect of our work. It can be fixed pretty easily. And everyone already knows how to fix it. To be fair, every administration wants unto themselves as much flexibility and freedom as they can get. What we need to do is take some of that back....
It sounds like what you're saying is that the issue here is not a philosophical dispute between the two parties, but technical changes to make sure the language of the law accords with its intent.
That's exactly right. Let me give you another example. The way the language is written right now, the resolution process could be used on an auto company. We want this clearly, solely to apply to financial institutions. That's just one example of a definition type of thing that has to be dealt with. But I think the rhetoric has been overheated, and I've cautioned against it. Little words mean a lot here. And I think we're better off discussing this issue on the substance. And there are other things, too. The bill does not adequately deal with one of the basic causes of this crisis, which was that underwriting was really bad. Now, we have to end any discussion of companies being too big to fail. But there are other important issues.
It all does sound very reasonable, and as though Corker really was approaching this from, if not a spirit of bipartisanship, at least from that of a conscientious legislator. And then came the McConnell letter.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) remained the lone GOP holdout Thursday night in a push by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to line up all 41 Republican senators behind a letter opposing the Democratic Wall Street reform bill.
The resistance from Collins slowed efforts by the Republican leadership to throw up a united front that would thwart a plan by Democrats to bring the financial regulatory bill to the floor as early as next week. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) needs support from at least one Republican to open debate on the bill.
Corker is now, once again, part of the united front against financial reform. He has pulled this before, when a few weeks ago he was lamenting the huge mistake Republicans had made in not working with Dems on health insurance reform, only to be brought back in line.
So the question now is whether it's going to be Collins playing the Snowe part.
Collins told POLITICO Thursday night that she "would like to see both sides come back together and work out a bipartisan bill because this should not be a partisan issue."
Ah, if only the Dems would just roll over for everything the Republicans demanded, we could have bipartisanship. So sad. Collins has said she won't vote for the bill, but she won't sign the letter. The letter itself, though not being released publicly, apparently doesn't draw a "bright line" saying Republicans will block the bill, though some of the signatories have said they would.
So we've got a good game of chicken brewing. The Dems say they are moving forward, and all but one Republicans say they'll obstruct. Stay tuned.