Ben Nelson's Snit

Why did Ben Nelson join his Republican colleagues in voting against the motion to proceed on Wall Street reform? Probably because of this:

Senate Democrats agreed Monday to kill a provision from their derivatives bill pushed by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc., a change one analyst predicted could force the Nebraska company to set aside up to $8 billion.

The Senate Agriculture Committee inserted language into its derivatives bill last week at the request of Sen. Ben Nelson (D., Neb.) that would have exempted any existing derivatives contracts from new collateral requirements—the money set aside to cover potential losses.

Ben Nelson apparently forgot the immense damage his "Cornhusker Kickback" did in the last big debate, feeding the backroom deals narrative for the opposition. He went for another one, this time on behalf of the country's (probably the world's) richest man. Yes, Warren Buffett is usually on the side of good when it comes to financial reform, having famously called derivatives "financial weapons of mass destruction." But on this one he's protecting Berkshire Hathaway and its own derivatives contracts.

Nelson also probably figured he had a freebie vote on this. Once Brown, Corker, Snowe, and Collins had all voted no, his wasn't going to be the killing vote. And you know how it is with Senate Dems--it's not likely going to cause him any great harm in the caucus. Hell, the DNC will probably fund more ads for him back home.

So Ben Nelson, once again, gives the pundits the opportunity to say opposition to reform is "bipartisan." Good job, Ben. You're really helping the cause.