Wall Street Threatens To Get Back At Politicians For Financial Reform

Bankers are planning to tighten the purse strings when it comes time to donate to political campaigns as a way of letting elected representatives know they’re not too happy about the whole financial reform thing.

Politico quotes an anonymous Wall Street bank executive:

“I think at least in the short term there is going to be a great deal of frustration with people who were beating the hell out of us — then turning around and asking for money.”

The post cites a Wall Street journal report the nation’s largest banks have favored Republicans to Democrats when it came to political giving, a switcheroo from last year.

Wall St. plans payback for reg reform [Politico via The Awl]


Edit Your Comment

  1. DeeJayQueue says:

    Good. I don’t think companies should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns anyway.

    • peebozi says:

      why do you hate America and the free market system?

      • JohnDeere says:

        the free market system was never meant to buy politicians. it is anti american.

        • Mecharine says:

          Its also malfeasance.

          Fun Fact: Adam Smith was for regulating many industries, because he thought that those industries would self-destruct in an orgy of greed.

          • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

            Yeah, but Adam Smith is dead, son. I’m alive.

            And thus,

      • bucklefilledbird says:

        “Hating America” and “Hating the Free Market System” are not one in the same, and NO system set up to allow the masses to have true control over their society will never be without corruption because of simple human nature.

      • chaesar says:

        troll says what?

    • econobiker says:

      Government is supposed to provide those things that the free market/private sector does not or make it easier for that sector to succeed in order to provide the people with better jobs, better services, etc because of growth and more tax collections. Right now the corporate free market demands more from government and pays back less to the people. The tail is not supposed to wag the dog.

  2. Grogey says:

    Lets see here… The voices of hundreds of citizen voters or the pockets of a few investors!

    I want to say the citizens will win out but sadly and disappointingly think the money will win out.

    • seishino says:

      They claim they’re going to donate less this year. So their interests will be heard less by politicians. Win / Win.

      • sonneillon says:

        I can get behind this statement. Their argument is silly, and politicians can be cold pricks when they think they are being publicly extorted by an industry. I have mixed feelings about the financial reform bill. Some things I like somethings I don’t like about it.

      • chargernj says:

        More likely the politicians will be stung and try even harder to appease Wall St so that they start donating again

    • mac-phisto says:

      i want an iphone 4. can you point me to the iphone 4?

  3. peebozi says:

    This is wonderful news because it’s the free market working at peak efficiency.

    If you don’t believe politicians should be bought and sold like $2 (male) whores on the streets of Amsterdam then you have to ask yourself one simple question….why do you hate America and the free market system?

  4. sagodjur says:

    Who would have thought that regulation would have two good results: the increased economic stability itself and the reduction of corruption in our politics…

  5. JoeS says:

    I’d rather vote for the party that isn’t being bought by the people and organizations that brought us the recessiion!

  6. Sayersj629 says:

    Our whole system is f’d.

  7. Megalomania says:

    If they stop donating to EVERYONE then it seems like everything works out great. Less money for attack ads, politicians don’t have to kotow for favor if they know there’s nothing in it for them.

    This might be the best side effect of financial reform.

  8. menty666 says:

    I’d have to sum it up with “Yay!!!”

  9. Coelacanth says:

    Really? I see this as good news. Maybe politicians will have to be a little more honest and accountable to more of their electorate.

  10. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    How is this bad? Less Wall Street influence in our political system.

    • NotEd says:

      Or more politicians that can be easily bought entering the system at the next election.

  11. Brunette Bookworm says:

    Good, political donations shouldn’t drive laws and reform. It’s supposed to be “by the people, for the people” not “by the corporations, for the corporations”…though I suppose the Supreme Court considers them people now.

  12. WiglyWorm must cease and decist says:

    “People beating the hell out of us – then turning around asking for money”?

    That could refer to the wall street types beating the taxpayers as easily as it could the politicians beating the wall streeters, couldn’t it?

  13. Nogard13 says:

    This is exactly what should happen. If a politician’s views and votes are not in line with what you want, then the solution is easy: don’t support him with donations. I do this every election year (give money to the politicians doing what I support and not donating to those that don’t), so why is this news?

    • TouchMyMonkey says:

      Well, I guess Wall Street thought they’d be able to buy off the Democrats like they did the Republicans. This is just poutrage over the fact that, while the Dems are more than happy to take their money, they’re still getting accountability shoved down their throats, and rightly so.

    • kujospam says:

      I just wish that congress did not get paid. They never got paid in the past. Being in congress used to be like a part time job, and a privilege. If they want to use their donations as living money that is fine with me, but they should get no benefits and compensation.

  14. dolemite says:

    Good. Politicians answer to the people, not corporations. At least in theory. And as said above, corporations should have strict limits imposed on what they can contribute.

  15. Wolfie XIII says:

    Wallstreet should be 100% banned from giving any politicians money ever.

  16. TailsToo says:

    Sadly, it just means that they’ll give more money to those friendly to the industry. So while the guy on the side of the people has a smaller amount of money, the bought pro-Wall Street guy will run 10x more ads, and have a much better chance of winning, because of all of the people who really have no idea, but remember that the first guy was bad because the TV told them so.

  17. DataShade says:

    ““I think at least in the short term there is going to be a great deal of frustration with people who were beating the hell out of us — then turning around and asking for money.””

    Really? Because when Wall Street’s system failures nearly destroyed the world economy, then those failing companies asked for a government bailout, there was a great deal of frustration with those people who had beat the hell out of us, and, last I checked, it wasn’t short term – it’s still going strong.

  18. usa_gatekeeper says:

    Anonymous’ expression of anger suggests there may actually be some good stuff in the reform package.

  19. gqcarrick says:

    Did anyone hear that? It sounded like a bunch of kids having a temper tantrum all at once.

  20. Duke_Newcombe-Making children and adults as fat as pigs says:

    At least for the meantime, there will be more than enough money to be made being a populist and beating up on the banks.

  21. FrugalFreak says:

    good! less influence

  22. SilverBlade2k says:

    Wall Street got themselves in this situation, and now they are whining and complaining with threats? HA. Sounds like a bunch of elementary bullies who got suspended…

  23. Judah says:

    This makes no sense. Wall street lobbyists already gutted the reform to the point where depression v2.0 will happen in a few years.

    I mean what are they going to do? Piss off the people who regulate them? That’s not a strategy… rather with the new supreme court decision about unlimited funding, I’d expect they’d be spending a whole lot MORE money now.

  24. Anaxamenes says:

    I yield the floor to Dick Cheney so he can tell you what to do…

  25. AugustaCassiopeia says:

    You mean Wall Street has to work on new ways to scam their customers due to toothless new laws that ostensibly prevent them from shafting the entire world for their own gain? Oh the Huge Manatee.

  26. banmojo says:

    There is no such thing as a 100% free market. Once a small group gets extraordinary power they will bend the ‘free market’ to their will and whim. Government IS needed to regulate business, in order that corruption and negative forces be kept in check. If this does not occur, we will end up back in a feudal system (we’re almost there already in many aspects). This isn’t about Dems vs Repubs. Get over your insistence to stick with a FAILED 2 party system and realize that EACH PROBLEM DESERVES ITS OWN CONSIDERATION ASIDES FROM PARTY PLATFORMS. We have the technology/intelligence/capability to create a more utopic society, but that requires tight policing of EVERYBODY involved because at the base humans are selfish narcissistic back stabbing power hungry self serving a-holes. We are, in short, our very own worst enemies. And the government is made up of … humans.

  27. grebby says:

    Yeah, right. They’re not that stupid. Lobbying and political contributions are the best “investments” a corporation can make.