Forum Post: Occupy the SEC and the Volker Rule
Posted 10 years ago on Nov. 16, 2013, 4:21 p.m. EST by shoozTroll
(17632)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
THE POWER OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
"In March, Occupy the SEC met with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve to present its 325-page public comment letter recommending that the Volcker Rule—a new regulation to limit Wall Street's most outrageous and dangerous behavior—be strengthened rather than gutted. Here's an insider scoop from the NYC-based working group on how a collection of students, finance insiders and activists went up against the big banks' lobbyists and became advocates for the 99%.
We know this much: the game of lawmaking is rigged. Moneyed interests lobby Congress and finance legislators’ campaigns, ensuring that Congress will pass laws that benefit them. But as much as the lawmaking process itself is unfair, there is another equally unfair part that receives far less attention: the rulemaking process.
Congress passes statutes, which serve as the framework for new regulations. It is then the job of regulatory agencies like the SEC, EPA and FCC to actually write those regulations. This is known as the “rulemaking process.” And thanks to a law from 1946 called the Administrative Procedure Act, regulators are required to request comments from us—the public—on new regulations.
So far so good. The problem is that it's not just individuals who can weigh in during the comment process. Regulators also accept comments from the very industries that their rules are meant to regulate. Worse still, those industries, their trade groups and their lawyers often make up the majority of the comment letters received on newly-proposed regulations. Occupy the SEC wanted to draw attention to this flawed process and to offer a different voice."
In case you missed it. There's also a petition..........:)
http://www.change.org/petitions/protect-the-people-not-the-banks-enforce-a-strong-volcker-rule
Many within the Occupy movement feel that our political system is so broken that it cannot be reformed—that we must start from scratch. Others feel that we must do what we can to reform the current way that rules are written and enforced. Here’s another option: do both! - See more at: http://www.occupy.com/article/power-public-comments#sthash.GeQ0UtoX.0BV3NAAc.dpuf
Succinctly put.
Yes, we can and should do both.
I think that the start over argument has been exploited and I think that the original message was lost. Let me be clear-there is still legislation that is on the table. Pretending that it doesn't exist is the most harmful. Both can be accomplished.
If you expect to have a tomorrow, you cannot ignore what's happening today.
Unless of course, the Koch's got you good and drunk.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/11/11/2923411/creepy-uncle-sam-tailgate/
That's the only way to do it. Keep 'em drunk. The odds are that they drank the beer, got hammered, and moved on.
Although we know "Generation Opportunity" threw the "party", I always wonder who the firms were that put together the PR campaign for them.
For instance.
Who designed that "Uncle Sam" costume, and what kind of research went into that design?
Are you wondering or do you know and you're holding out?
I have no idea. They sure are trying to get a lot of mileage out of it though.
OccupytheSEC, revisited.
"There is a tendency in recent American political discourse to use the term “populism” as a form of putdown. The implication is that that while populists may have some legitimate grievances, they are rebelling in a disorganized and ill-informed way. As President Obama implied in early 2009, the populists have pitchforks, while his administration represented the responsible mainstream.
This is an inaccurate portrayal of populism in America, both historically and today. Occupy Wall Street is a perfect example. To be sure, part of that 2011 movement was purely about expressing frustration – justified frustration – at how very powerful people in the finance sector had behaved and continue to behave. But the movement also led to an important offshoot or related development, Occupy the S.E.C., which focused on the Securities and Exchange Commission.
This group wrote a brilliant commentary on the originally proposed Volcker Rule, which is designed to limit proprietary trading and other forms of excessive risk-taking at very large banks. Their comments, along with the work of others who wanted more effective reform, were helpful in pushing officials toward the final Volcker Rule, which was just unveiled."
Success and good news, gets SO little commentary.
The ONLY way to change the system, is to engage it.
if the banks control the money,
they're not at risk
Except, when they are?
"This group wrote a brilliant commentary on the originally proposed Volcker Rule, which is designed to limit proprietary trading and other forms of excessive risk-taking at very large banks. Their comments, along with the work of others who wanted more effective reform, were helpful in pushing officials toward the final Volcker Rule, which was just unveiled."
If there was no risk, there would have been been no "crash" and we would not be in the position we are.
the payout after the crash shows there is no risk when they control the money
And thus.......
Occupy the SEC.
junk bonds/stock exchange launder the money
The banks would have greater leverage if the people had less money
and that's trending
So we should abandon Occupy the SEC?
It wasn't worth it?
Did you see this yet?
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-story-of-the-flash-crash/
relations between the banks and the people remain unchanged
I'm being charged $5,000 for not being able to pay my student loan this year
I get that, but it's a different subject.
There is a place for you, among the affinity groups.
http://www.occupystudentdebtcampaign.org/
thank you massa
fer real Matt.
You should sign in and see if they can help you.
I worry for my daughter, who is also building up student debt.
it's like the money system is rigged or something
Would Wallstreet do that?
Wouldn't that go against their libe(R)tarian principle of self reliance and responsibility?
With the help of "private investors" like the Koch's, you're damn right they would.
wall street is where property owners buy up other peoples property
because they can leverage more cash than anyone else
The serious business continues, with a new letter to the FDIC.
http://www.occupythesec.org/
and now back to your regularly scheduled libe(R)tarian smear campaigns.