Wall Street Ends Hope for Homeowners Via Congress
By Shamus Cooke
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13887
Global Research, June 7, 2009
As if the bank bailouts weren't proof enough that Wall Street owned
Congress. History will likely show that these bailouts involved the largest
transfer of wealth ever - from the working class to that small group of
billionaires who own the corporations.
This fact is recognized by most people now and is such common
knowledge that even the mainstream media feels comfortable discussing
it...matter-of-factly.
These corporations have also exerted tremendous influence in other
realms of politics, working towards destroying Obama's campgain promises of
health care, job creation, civil liberties, the Employee Free Choice Act,
peace, etc.
In each case, the promised reform was gutted of its essence, and
"compromise" versions of the bills are now being discussed: instead of
universal health care, we will likely be universally mandated to purchase
health insurance; instead of "job creation" we are told that the stimulus
has "saved jobs" (contrary to the evidence); while troops are "drawing down"
from Iraq, the war in Afghanistan/Pakistan is being escalated; instead of
allowing workers to organize unions easier, a compromise version - Employee
Free Choice Act, minus card check - seems more politically "pragmatic," etc.
Even Obama's smaller reforms face similar partial abortions in
Congress. For example, Obama recently signed into legislation the Helping
Families Save Their Homes Act. But, as The New York Times pointed out, the
bill "was missing its centerpiece: a change in bankruptcy law he [Obama]
once championed that would have given judges the power to lower the amount
owed on a home loan." ( Ailing, Banks Still Field Strong Lobby at Capitol,
June 6, 2009)
Obama was not demanding that foreclosures cease, or that those who've
recently lost their homes - because of the economic crisis - be allowed to
return to them; he was merely advocating that those who can still afford
mortgage payments be allowed to lower their balances.
Even this small crumb for homeowners was rejected by Wall Street,
whose profits would have suffered.
The New York Times explains: "... the [bills] real threat was to their
[the banks] profits. The proposal would have shifted negotiating power to
the millions of troubled homeowners who could use the threat of bankruptcy
to wrest lower monthly payments from lenders."
This truth prompted an oddly blunt reply from Democratic Senator
Sheldon Whitehouse:
"This is one of the most extreme examples I have seen of a special
interest wielding its power for the special interest of a few against the
general benefit of millions of homeowners and thousands of communities now
being devastated by foreclosure."
The New York Times article also quieted those apologists for Obama who
claim that he is an honest leader held back by an unreasonably conservative
Democratic Congress:
"Throughout it all, the banks took advantage of the Obama
administration's seeming ambivalence. Despite its occasional populist
rhetoric, the White House was conspicuously absent from weeks of pivotal
negotiations this spring."
And:
"While Mr. Obama reaffirmed his support for the proposal shortly
after becoming president, administration officials barely participated in
the negotiations, a factor that [corporate] lobbyists said significantly
strengthened their hand."
It must be noted that the corporation's next big demand on the
government will be to eliminate the tremendous U.S. debt, which they rightly
view as a destabilizing factor for making profits. The problem lies in how
they will propose to correct the problem: through the gutting of the U.S.
social safety nets such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other
programs that benefit working families and the poor.
This government debt is the direct result of trillion dollar bank
bailouts and wars of aggression that benefit only the rich. The working
class, however, is being enlisted to pay for these polices.
The New York Times article ends with an important lesson:
"There was no counterweight to that [the banks] legislative muscle.
Bankrupt homeowners do not have a political action committee or lobbyists."
And while labor unions do have lobbyists, they cannot compete with the
purchasing power of the banks. The fact that these two groups are both
members of the same political party - vying for the ear of the same
politicians - is utter lunacy. This tactic has yielded absolutely zero
results for workers: every progressive promise of Obama's has been butchered
beyond recognition, or outright ignored.
This is because the Democratic Party is a party of big business, now
more than ever. This fact is especially important in these times of economic
crisis, where corporations are - because of shrinking profits - becoming
louder in their condemnation of unions, while being emboldened by Obama's
horrendous anti-labor handling of the General Motors and Chrysler
bankruptcies.
The political power of the corporations is dramatically exposing the
rotten nature of America's political and economic system - represented by
the Republicans and Democrats - where the tremendous wealth of a small group
allows them unprecedented power at the expense of millions of others.
Without an independent political voice, the working class will continue to
be "betrayed" by Democratic politicians whose pie in the sky campaign
promises fail to yield even crumbs.
Shamus Cooke is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer
for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org). He can be reached
-----------------
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ShadowGovernment" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/ShadowGovernment
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
