Skip to main content

Well, this is kind of embarrassing for a sitting member of Congress who just participated in a major financial reform overhaul.

Earlier this year, as the financial reform debate was taking shape in D.C., one idea on the table, promoted by U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell and U.S. Sen. John McCain, was reinstituting the Glass-Steagall Act, a Depression-era reform that put a firewall between Wall Street investment banks and Main Street commercial banks....

On Saturday, Rep. Reichert, for his part, was caught at a candidate forum at the Newcastle chamber, clueless as to what Glass-Steagall even is....

Question from the audience: “I agree with you that overregulation is not a good thing, but do you think that they should reinstate The Glass-Steagall Act and at least separate the banks’ ability to gamble with our money?”

Reichert:

“Well, the Glass-Steagall Act is one that I’m not familiar with. I’m sorry I have to go back and look at that, but I do agree it’s something that we haven’t dealt with on the House side in committees that I’ve had, so I’d be happy to look at that and come back and give you an answer on that.”

Watch (and note what sounds like an incredulous laugh when Reichert admits his ignorance):

And that's after the questioner gave him a big fat clue: "at least separate the banks’ ability to gamble with our money?” Not to mention the months and months of debate over financial reform in Congress this year, which Reichert seems to have missed. Maybe he was just waiting for his leadership to tell him how to vote and not really paying attention to the debate.

In contrast, here's Dem candidate Suzan DelBene back in June in an interview with PubliCola, arguing for a modern version of Glass-Steagall."

We could help raise the IQ in the House at least marginally by booting Reichert and by helping Suzan DelBene get to Congress.

Goal Thermometer

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:46 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  but how would this help the media's narrative (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, Matt Z, beltane, happymisanthropy

    that the democrats may not win a single seat this year?

    Republicans===the party of the 1% rich people in America. Or in other words..The Party of NO!

    by jalapeno on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:49:29 PM PDT

    •  I'm doing phonebanking for DelBene (11+ / 0-)

      Yesterday, I was calling senior Independents in Bellevue, Issaquah and Renton. I don't know these areas well but Bellevue definitely leans right and I suspect the other two areas are mixed. So I was expecting a lot of hangups. Surprisingly, after a hundred calls, I got an equal number voting for DelBene and Reichert.

      Remember these are Independents, not Dems. They also were all seniors. I was surprised. If that breakout is true for all Independents in her district, she has a shot at this one. I also met the candidate when I asked her where the bathrooms were. BTW she looks better in person. ;-)

  •  OMG!!!!!! where do the rethugs get these (4+ / 0-)

    ppl?

    "Sir, you are a very clever man, but not very wise. Everyone knows it's turtles, all the way down."

    by hester on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:49:48 PM PDT

  •  Oh, <that> Glass-Steagall Act! n/t (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joan McCarter, The Nose, FORUS50, CKendall
  •  Thanks for posting the stark (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose
    differences between the two.  Scary. And he's going to win?
  •  pleasepleaseplease Eastside... (5+ / 0-)

    Get that piece of shit out.

    I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

    by punditician on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:53:25 PM PDT

  •  saw this Tweet on NY TIMES (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew

    #2010: Tweets From The Times
    Suzan DelBene spent $1.25 million in recent filing period; Dave Reichert just $150k. He has $1.3 million left to her $268k as of 9/30.

    •  Dat's not Cool! (0+ / 0-)

      Maybe the DCCC will jump in if they see a pick up opportunity.  

      How much has she spent on ground game vs ads?  The ground game money could still be paying dividends through the election, but the ads would have been aired and forgotten.  

      Imagine Pelosi having to have the gavel over to Boehner, and the shit eating grin he'll have as the GOP caucus erupts into raucous applause.

      by Jonze on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:59:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Reichert is an empty suit. eom (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose
  •  Probably doesn't know Gramm-Leach-Bliley, either. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose, mightymouse

    Since he wasn't there to vote for that abomination. Wonder if he knows where the Establishment Clause is.

    It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Fish in Illinois on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:58:47 PM PDT

  •  Suzan DelBene is what WA-08 needs... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    714day, Matt Z, Vita Brevis

    Start packing up your things, Reichert.

    GOTV...Republicans suck.

    by DeadHead on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:58:49 PM PDT

  •  Also, it's hard to tell the difference between (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bwren

    him, and the comedy:

    I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

    by punditician on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 06:59:03 PM PDT

  •  Reichart it was one of the more likeable (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans. Sadly, Dems need every seat they can get.

    Go Suzane!

  •  Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary (0+ / 0-)

    Control Act:

    The Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act, a United States federal financial statute law passed in 1980, gave the Federal Reserve greater control over non-member banks.

    wiki

    this seems to be the real problem.

  •  Well he's no Hoot Smalley (6+ / 0-)

    but he is my Congressman :(

    Hopefully not for long!

    Just like Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell is a master baiter.

    by Vita Brevis on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:08:18 PM PDT

  •  The Seattle Times... (9+ / 0-)

    ...our only daily newspaper, endorsed challenger Suzan DelBene in the primary. One of the reasons they cited was Reichert's inability to explain his vote against Wall Street Reform. In their general election endorsement of DelBene, just days before this video was shot, the Times specifically cited DelBene's support of reinstating Glass-Steagall as one reason for her endorsement.

    Still, Reichert drew a complete blank. Amazing.

    Conservatives have a special gift for cloaking self-interest in self-righteousness.

    by Sarge in Seattle on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:10:26 PM PDT

  •  I hate Republicans (6+ / 0-)
    All of them.  

    I mean, really.  If they truly believe the crap they spout, they are idiots.  If they don't, they are soulless lying pandering charlatans, like Toomey, railing about the terrible economic effects of card check, cap-and-trade and the 'government takeover' of health care.  You know -- LAWS THAT DON'T EXIST, or exist only in his light-bulb-shaped head.

    And like Reichert and so many others, if they are completely ignorant of what the fuck is going on in the country, then they are ... completely ignorant.  

    And yet ... they are poised for massive gains.

    I also hate voters.

    Does anyone think 2006 and 2008 resulted from a great enlightenment?  I wish.  A strong majority knew the GOP sucked and threw them out.  But no ice cream appeared in the two years since, so now, dammit, out with the Democrats.

    Andrew Mellon & GOP: 'In a Depression, assets return to their rightful owners'

    by Tuffie on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:10:53 PM PDT

  •  It's ok to admit you don't know something. (10+ / 0-)

    But not understanding the deregulation of our investment banking system?

    That's unacceptable in 2010.

    2 weeks til Election Day. Sign up at OFA today.

    by Benintn on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:11:56 PM PDT

    •  if you are a congressman (0+ / 0-)

      i looked it up just now...glass-steagall was a fairly comprehensive,no nonsense law. It wasn't until 1980 that it went sour...again. With the The Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act.

      Money needs to be separated from the U.S. governments control, just like religion supposedly is.

      hahahahaha

  •  the narrative is so stupid right now (6+ / 0-)

    where are the professionals?

    limbaugh: deregulation did not cause the banking crisis, socialism caused it.

    limbaugh: i will tell you everything you need to know.

    glass steagall is in every high school american history textbook.

  •  Oh, good grief. What an embarrassment. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    714day, sharman, The Nose, Matt Z

    Did Reichert even know enough to be embarrassed?

    "Don't let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do." John Wooden

    by CKendall on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:20:31 PM PDT

  •  I recently learned my grandfather (5+ / 0-)

    was involved in intellectual efforts and proposals that lead eventually to Glass-Stegall.

    It is within this historical context that economists at the
    University of Chicago presented their proposal for reform of the banking system.' The six page memorandum on banking reform which was given limited and confidential distribution to about 40 individuals on March 16, memorandum was Agriculture, 1933 [Knight 19331. sent to Henry A. Wallace, then Secretary of with a cover letter signed by Frank Knight. The letter listed the following supporters of the plan: L. W. Mints, Henry Schultz, H. C. Simons, G. V. Cox, Aaron Director, Paul Douglas, and A. G. Hart.

    The authors anticipated skepticism about their plan as evidenced by a typed postscript which stated:

    "We hope you are one of the forty odd who get this who will not think we are quite looney (sic), I think Viner really agrees but doesn't believe it good politics."

    The proposal opens with the statement:
    "It is evident that drastic measures must soon be taken with' reference to banking, currency, and federal fiscal policy." The general recommendations were:
    (a) The general recommendations federal guarantee of deposits; (b) the guarantee only be taken as part of a drastic program of banking reform which will certainly and permanently prevent any possible recurrence of the present banking crisis; and (c) the Administration announce and
    pursue a policy of bringing about, and maintaining a moderate increase in the level of wholesale prices, not to exceed 15 percent

    The detailed suggestions advocated outright ownership of the Federal Reserve Banks; the guarantee of the deposits of member banks which were open for business March 3rd, 1933 but subject to full supervisory control over the management of these banks by the Fed. They advocated the issue of Federal Reserve Notes, which should be declared legal tender, in any amounts which may be necessary to meet demands for payment by depositors. Further, the Federal Reserve Banks should liquidate the assets of all member banks, pay off liabilities, and dissolve all existing banks and new institutions should be created which accepted only demand deposits subject to a 100% reserve requirement in lawful money and/or deposits with the Reserve Banks. Saving deposits would be handled through the incorporation of investment trusts. Present banking institutions would continue deposit and lending functions under Federal Reserve supervision until the new institutions can be put into place. The government should then undertake to raise the price level by 15 percent by fiscal and currency means but further inflation (beyond 15 percent) be prevented. Finally, there should be suspension of free-coinage of gold, embargo upon gold import, prohibition of private export of gold, call in all gold coins in exchange for Federal Reserve notes, suspension of the gold-clause in all debt contracts, and substantial government sale and export of gold abroad.

    Henry Wallace, then Secretary of Agriculture, gave the Chicago plan to Roosevelt less than a week after it was distributed. Wallace hoped FDR would give the plan serious consideration, though the plan was a radical break with the past. Wallace wrote to Roosevelt:

    The memorandum from the Chicago economists which I gave you at [the] Cabinet meeting Tuesday, is really awfully good and I hope that you or Secretary Woodin will have the time and energy to study it. Of course the plan outlined is quite a complete break with our present banking history.
    It would be an even more decisive break than the founding of the Federal Reserve System [Wallace to Roosevelt, March 23, 19331.

    G.V. Cox is Garfield Vestal Cox, my maternal grandfather and Dean of the School of Business at the University of Chicago at the time.

    What is really interesting is that many of these men were conservative economists of their time. They are the beginning of what became known as the Chicago School of Economics. It is very interesting to learn that he/they were also involved in sensible reworking of the banking system to solve the problems brought to light by the crash and great depression.

    It is also very telling to read the modern conservatives describing an earlier attempt by these economists (my grandfather included) to get Hoover to act on them in this way:

    One of the most important expressions of monetary and fiscal thought by economists in the depression was a conference of some of the nation's leading economists in January, 1932, at the University of Chicago, under the aegis of the Institute on Gold and Monetary Stabilization.[31]  The Chicago meeting received wide notice, as well it might. Twenty-four economists there recommended the following to President Hoover: (1) what later became the Glass-Steagall Act; (2) a systematic campaign of FRB open-market purchases of securities; (3) RFC aid to banks with ineligible assets; (4) maintaining a public-works program; (5) Federal unemployment relief; and (6) lowering tariffs. With the exception of the last plank, President Hoover, as we have seen, adopted every one of these inflationary and interventionist proposals. Part of the responsibility for the Hoover program and its aggravation of the depression must therefore rest on these eminent advisers who steered him so incorrectly.[32]

    I don't know economics well enough to be able to decipher all the in's and out's at a high enough level but it seems to me that they were trying to get Hoover to work to solve some of the problems and which he attempted in part... much to the dismay of modern conservatives. That they then worked on FDR to go even further which he did... to the utter disgust of modern conservatives.

    But at least these guys were honestly trying to solve the problem and right the ship and willing to work with democrats and republicans alike to get the job done.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:23:32 PM PDT

    •  and it's still sound jugdement! (0+ / 0-)

      c) the Administration announce and
      pursue a policy of bringing about, and maintaining a moderate increase in the level of wholesale prices, not to exceed 15 percent

    •  Holy crap, your granddad was a pinko Commie!!! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Andrew C White, Krush, Matt Z

      Just kidding.

      That's such a cool story - what a great legacy.

      Glass-Steagall wasn't perfect but it certainly provided some protections that were sorely lacking in 2008.

      I hope and pray we can address our current global economic crisis before we get back to where we were in 1933.

      2 weeks til Election Day. Sign up at OFA today.

      by Benintn on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:33:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Whoops I see somehow (0+ / 0-)

      the screwed up part of the cut and paste. Not sure how that happened but near the top of the the first block quote it should read

      memorandum was sent to Henry A. Wallace, then Secretary of Agriculture,

      and not the mess that it does read.

      "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

      by Andrew C White on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:35:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's very cool. (n/t) (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Andrew C White, Matt Z
      •  Thanks... I think so too (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z

        I came across a couple similar references to these in the last couple weeks. I'm trying to do some more digging and find out more detail... as well as understand what the hell he was talking about a bit better. My knowledge of economics is very basic.

        Unfortunately he had TB and was a prematurely old man when I was a child. I have very fond memories of him but never had the chance to have adult conversations with him. Something I regret greatly today as I grapple with trying to understand the implications of economic policies with which he was so knowledgeable.

        Weird thing is I think he was one of Milton Friedman's teachers. I know they knew each other well and worked together after Friedman started teaching at the U of C but I think he was one of his teachers as well. I've discovered that there is correspondence between them in Friedman's archives. I'm going to see if I can get copies of it.

        Weird thing number two is that I also recently got proof of a story my mother used to tell me that he was friends with Albert Schweitzer as well and that Schweitzer stayed at their house during his American trip in 46 (?).

        How I reconcile those two things is... challenging. < chuckling >

        Peace,

        Andrew

        "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

        by Andrew C White on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:47:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  a perfect illustration (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z, Chiquitalinda

    I think this episode is a perfect illustration of the basic differences between Democrats and right-wingers in the GOP. I feel that Republicans seek elected office just so they can wield power and exercise their ideology.

    Democrats, on the other hand, seem a lot more interested in actually governing. By governing I mean working as a policy maker who wants to make government an effective public institution.

    Someone who is genuinely interested in being an effective legislator will know things like what the Glass-Steagall Act is, or where in the Constitution the separation of church and state is referenced. Someone with a different agenda, or who is simply clueless, doesn't feel they really have to exhibit and basic competence in the office they're running for.  

    Look at some of the current bright lights of the Republican Party: Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, Michelle Bachmann, Christine O'Donnell, Joe Miller. These aren't just people whose ideas I disagree with; they're circus clowns who have no place in any government anywhere. Compared to these fools I actually have respect for smarmy and pathologically disingenuous people like Mitt Romney and Carly Fiorina.  

    Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx

    by Joe Bob on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 07:40:43 PM PDT

  •  Although I am not employed (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, Matt Z, Chiquitalinda

    I kicked in $19 for Act Blue, including $10 to DelBene since she is running in my district. There would be nothing as sweet as DelBene to win this seat despite the "Dems are doomed" media narrative dominating the airwaves.

  •  A relative of mine was at that Newcastle event (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, The Nose, Matt Z, FininWA

    He said that Reichert would only come to the event if he didn't have to appear at the same time as DelBene - he came in first and spoke first and left before she arrived. All of the other candidates (for state office) had almost mini-debates with their opponents.

    Apparently Reichert came off as running on his reputation, incumbency, and self-tanner, and DelBene was very impressive and knowledgeable. I have hopes (fingers crossed) of a pickup here and it seems like he might be running scared this time. Plus he's been running "Nancy Pelosi is scaaaary" ads, which I don't think play as well here as other places.

  •  I think Reichert's answer to the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, egarratt, Matt Z

    question was nothing short of amazing...  If more Republicans would tell the truth, this election would look totally different.

    He's probably gonna get slapped by someone upstairs for his candid answer, but in the meantime I'm giving him points for doing something I've heard NO OTHER Republican do for ... oh, about two years.

    Kick apart the structures - Seth

    by ceebee7 on Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 10:22:51 PM PDT

    •  True comment, but... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Nose

      I don't expect every politician to have a genius IQ, but is it asking much for them to have a clue on the big issues of the day and not to just vote on what they're told to vote on. I know every Dem isn't a genius either, but it seems to me more Dems are up on the issues of the day and demonstrate it when they go out to speak in front of people other then the guy Green from South Carolina who sounds just like a rehearsed Repub when he won't veer from the script when on TV.

      Repub fans agree with C. O'Donnell and think being ignorant is a good thing and simply like the idea of having a beer with their representative and no worries if they have no clue on what the issues or facts are that they're busy complaining about. Just sound good when you say it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site