When I saw this press release a couple of weeks ago from Rep. John Carter I knew something was wrong, Carter Votes for House Passage of JOBS Act.
The Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act, HR 3606, passed the House this afternoon with the support of House Republican Conference Secretary John Carter– legislation to help expand private capital investment in small businesses and provide more American entrepreneurs with the opportunity to grow and create jobs. The bill passed the House by a wide bipartisan margin of 390-23. All Republicans voted yes; 23 Democrats voted no.
“This is an exciting day to actually pass a jobs bill that can become law,” says Carter. After having dozens of House-passed jobs bills blocked by the Senate during this session, it is a relief to finally succeed with investment incentives to create new private sector jobs.”
It’s never a good sign, Carter is not the kind of legislator that would vote for a “New Deal” style jobs act. Well, surprise, surprise this isn’t. I did some snooping around and this is actually a very bad bill. So why does such a bad bill get almost a unanimous vote in the US House? A body that can agree on little if anything comes together on this bill, why? Well this is a pretty good clue, The problematic JOBS Act.
But this doesn’t mean that I’m a supporter of the JOBS Act more generally, which has been vehemently opposed not only by the usual subjects (Eliot Spitzer, Simon Johnson) but also by the much more centrist editorial board of the New York Times, which almost never saw a bipartisan bill it didn’t like. Even Bloomberg View has come out strongly against the act, in an editorial which, it’s worth remembering, is meant to broadly reflect the views of Mike Bloomberg personally. The SEC opposes it, as do former SEC officials like Arthur Levitt and a long list of consumer organizations.
I don’t fully understand the political dynamics here. A bill which was essentially drafted by a small group of bankers and financiers has managed to get itself widespread bipartisan support, even as it rolls back decades of investor protections. That wouldn’t have been possible a couple of years ago, and I’m unclear what has changed. But one thing is coming through loud and clear: anybody looking to Congress to be helpful in the fight to have effective regulation of financial institutions, is going to be very disappointed. Much more likely is that Congress will be actively unhelpful, and will do whatever the financial industry wants in terms of hobbling regulators and deregulating as much activity as it possibly can. Dodd-Frank, it seems, was a brief aberration. Now, we’re back to business as usual, and a captured Congress.
Here’s more from Crooks and Liars,Which Lobby Wrote the JOBS (Jivers’ Opportunity to Bilk Suckers’) Act? Solving a Mystery, including the video below.
Whenever Washington politicians get together on something “bipartisan,” there’s a very good chance it’s a lobbyist-driven initiative — one that will enrich the lobbyists” patrons, generate campaign funds for pliant politicians, and stick it to pretty much everyone else.
Want to know where a “bipartisan” bill comes from? Follow the money.
It’s sad, but in this day and age the only bill that can garner massive bipartisan support is one that the banksters favor. Don’t forget, Money buys results & erodes trust.