Progressive groups and those arguing for stronger Wall Street reform have targeted Russ Feingold as a key for pulling the bill in a stronger direction, and to offset the bargaining power of Scott Brown. Feingold joined Maria Cantwell as a vote against the package as it came out of the Senate, both voting no because the bill wasn't strong enough. By being vocal about his strong demands for a better final bill, Feingold could provide an effective counter-weight to the forces trying to weaken the bill.
And it appears that he's ready to take that role. TPM's Brian Beutler reports:
"During debate on the financial regulatory reform bill, I made it clear that I would only support a strong bill that can prevent another financial crisis," Feingold's statement reads. "Neither the House bill nor the Senate bill pass that test."
I have spoken to Senate leaders, the Obama administration, and members of the conference committee and made my concerns well known. I opposed deregulating Wall Street and eliminating the protections of the Glass-Steagall Act, a position which put me at odds with many in Washington who supported the very policies that contributed to the financial crisis, and who now support these bills that simply don't get the job done. Without including stronger reforms, we're simply whistling past the graveyard.
Tomorrow, congressional negotiators will determine whether to include the Merkley-Levin amendment in the final legislation, and whether that amendment should be tweaked to allow federally insured banks to invest in hedge funds. Without Feingold's support, the deciding vote on the final bill belongs to Republican Sen. Scott Brown, who's been pushing to allow that very objection. To flip the dynamic, progressives and reformers have been pressuring Feingold to consider changing his vote, and in his statement, Feingold seems to suggest he's game.
As Beutler says, that isn't a definitive no, and to make that point, Feingold included a list of provisions he'd like to see:
* Cantwell-McCain-Feingold amendment to restore the Glass-Steagall firewall between Wall Street and Main Street
* Senator Dorgan's "too big to fail" amendment, which requires that no financial entity be permitted to become so large that its failure threatens the financial stability of the U.S.
* Brown-Kaufman amendment proposing strict limits on the size of financial institutions
* Dorgan amendment to ban so-called naked credit default swaps, speculative bets that played a role in the economic crisis
* Merkley-Levin amendment to prohibit any bank with government insured deposits from engaging in high-risk finance, like investing in hedge funds or private equity funds
What's critical for Feingold is finding a ay to break apart the big banks, or at the least, get them out of the casino. If the Scott Brown and big bank effort to create a Swiss-cheese Volcker Rule, Feingold will most likely remain a "no." It'd sure make for a stronger bill to get Feingold on board than to worry about Brown. There are other amendments key to both Snowe and Collins in the bill that will make their votes gettable, so caving to Scott Brown shouldn't be necessary.