Byron Dorgan on the 1999 Financial Modernization Act

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - October 2nd, 2008, 12:30AM

In 1999 Congress passed the Financial Modernization Act, which allowed banks, insurance companies and investment houses to merge. Many experts point to it as one of the causes of our current financial crisis. At the time, Byron Dorgan was one of the few senators to speak out strongly against the legislation. Looking back, his predictions in 1999 seem prophetic and, looking forward, his views raise more questions about the $700 billion bailout plan.

Video after the jump

 

Source:
Byron Dorgan’s Crystal Ball
Lagan Sebert
American News Project, Oct 01, 2008
http://americannewsproject.com/node/135

American News Project
1050 17th Street NW, Suite 550
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202) 955-6460
A project of The Tides Center

Comments

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

28 Responses to “Byron Dorgan on the 1999 Financial Modernization Act”

  1. Ricky in Columbus Says:

    What we learn from history is that we don’t learn from history.

  2. Solodoc Says:

    This commentary is surprising given that last I saw, Mr. Ritholtz SUPPORTED the bailout.

  3. pete Says:

    The fundamental argument against the bailout is this:

    As recently as a few months ago Paulson and Bernanke were assuring us that both the economy and the financial system were fine (even though people like Barry and Nouriel Roubini and others were saying otherwise)

    Now that they have been proven wrong it means that they are either incompetent or were intentionally misleading the American people. Either way they have 0 credibility at best and at worse represent a clear and present danger to the United States of America.

  4. Nunca Says:

    Dorgan may be right on this issue, (maybe this is a fluke?), but he is otherwise one of those crazy-anti-market-let’s-have-the-government-run-everything Lefties. Not your father’s Democrat. Wasn’t he in favor of the windfall profits tax on oil? One for two at best.

  5. chim Says:

    Powerful video. The last words trailing off are also very chilling at the end . . .

    “does that diminish the dollar . . . maybe the currency collapses . . . what are the potential consequences of doing this without some notion or some reasonable certainty that this will work?”

    In ten years, no doubt, we will be reviewing this video again.

  6. debreuil Says:

    “he is otherwise one of those crazy-anti-market-let’s-have-the-government-run-everything Lefties”

    I didn’t realize he was a former wall-street-executive-in-a-time-of-personal-need.

  7. brion Says:

    “This commentary is surprising given that last I saw, Mr. Ritholtz SUPPORTED the bailout.”

    Is that true?
    Or did Barry simply support “Doing something”? Cause, you know, ya gotta DO something!”

  8. Michael Says:

    The last man to do nothing was Dick Fuld…

  9. meneame.net Says:

    Byron Dorgan: El hombre que predijo la crisis dice que el rescate es un error

    En 1999 el congreso americano aprobo el plan de modernizacion financiera que permitia a bancos, aseguradoras y casas de inversion a fusionarse – algo que los expertos consideran una de las raices de la actual crisis. Byron Dorgan fue uno de los pocos s…

  10. EvilHenryPaulson Says:

    You need some degree of compartmentalization or internal efforts are focussed on the highest rate of return without serving one’s core markets. By weighting the value of the markets, one can properly allocate resources in a way that minimizes CoVaR to give higher expected returns.

  11. Greg0658 Says:

    the video is set to self start on arrival … please fix this for us surfers with older/slower equipment

  12. Anders Aronsson Says:

    In the past couple of month all of the investment banks have embraced commercial banking. I don’t believe they had a choice. If it weren’t for unnecessary government regulation they would never have been separate entities in the first place.

  13. Peter G. Says:

    Your post on Senator Dorgan gave me pause.
    There he is again… twice in as many days.

    I didn’t know much about Senator Dorgan until briefly tuning in to yesterday’s Senate hearings. He opened the day’s session with the first order of business which was the passage of Bill H.R.7081 / U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation.

    My jaw literally dropped with his recounting of the events of September/01, and how some very real nuclear alarm bells were silently going off at the time. India and the region being the topic, he went on to offer some warnings and predictions about the mismanagement and lack of oversight(!) on the most dangerous weapon we know.

    Scary stuff… big picture stuff.

    Of course…
    …not nearly as scary as the time someone told me about them thar CDS’s!

  14. palmtree1 Says:

    Yeah, let’s not do anything. The market is SO much smarter and will do SUCH a better job; just reference Andrew Mellon and Richard Whitney for the historical antecedents..

  15. freeJack Says:

    “Of all the offspring of Time, Error is the most ancient, and is so old and familiar an acquaintance, that Truth, when discovered, comes upon most of us like an intruder, and meets the intruder’s welcome.”

    I always liked that quote.
    Thank you Anders Aronsson, for the unintentional reminder.

  16. TDL Says:

    It’s odd that people so dogmatically confuse mercantilism with free markets, then emphatically voice their opposition to the later. Outside of Glass Steagall being abolished, what other “excessive de-regulations” occurred? Note: not regulating certain entities & products that evolved in the past ten or twenty years does not count as de-regulation. What regulations were abolished & what laws, outside of Glass Steagall, were abolished? Or am I a “wingnut” for even asking this question?

    Regards,
    TDL

  17. Bob A Says:

    Some of us even remember when “First Interstate Bank” was the first bank to operate in more than one state.

  18. Mitchn Says:

    No debate, no open committee hearings, complete disregard of constituents’ opinions and interests. No taxation without (real) representation! Vote the stoneheads out in November!

  19. james lewman Says:

    I need to ask a question. Are you people stupid or just in DENIAL? The BAILOUT is leftist socialism!!!!!!! Fanny and Freddy,AIG
    all of the BAILOUT. If you stupid Repugs truly believed in Free market capitalism you would be screaming FOUL but you ass wholes make up the rules as you go.

  20. james lewman Says:

    I need to ask a question. Are you people stupid or just in DENIAL? The BAILOUT is leftist socialism!!!!!!! Fanny and Freddy,AIG
    all of the BAILOUT. If you stupid Repugs truly believed in Free market capitalism you would be screaming FOUL but you ass wholes make up the rules as you go.

  21. Steve Says:

    Dorgan is a moderate Democrat in a very red state. If he were that far left, he wouldn’t get elected. Can the name calling children leave and do their non-productive rants in private? The adults in the room would like to have a conversation. It is time that Americans start have a real exchange of ideas and stop tearing our own country apart. Having an open mind is not the same as have an empty head.

  22. Joe Tate Says:

    Stupid Repugs? Did you say Repug? Well what’s a Repug?

    If you could quench your partisan anger for a moment, you would realize that it seems that the average American is AGAINST using tax payer money to bailout those that screwed up.

    Paulson thumbed a guess that it would take $700B and all the politicians seem to accept it as fact, instead of first trying to find out what the correct action is and how much it will cost. Then before doling out any of OUR tax money, put a plan in place to make sure that this doesn’t happen again.

    Quit taking sides… they want you to take sides so that you will blame the other side without realizing that BOTH SIDES are to blame. A bill will get passed and everyone that has a say in it will get a piece of what they want, but that doesn’t mean you or I will get what we want.

  23. euthyfro Says:

    He looks like Donald Rumsfeld to me.
    “one of those crazy-anti-market-let’s-have-the-government-run-everything Lefties” he is not.
    1999…that was when we put out http://www.marxist.com/world-economy-perspectives141099.htm
    read closely the section “Marx on Credit”.

  24. Joe Tate Says:

    Also, don’t forget that CRA ratings were tied to the FMA, in addition to Fannie and Freddy in place to launder that bad debt (and cooking the books). Plenty of blame to be shared by all in charge… but no solutions offered to fix the problems.

  25. Robert Gunzenhauser Says:

    President Clinton disagrees with your view. Allowing banks, investment banks, and insurance companies to merge has helped. Notice that the big splash of failures has occurred in the pure play investment banks and in insurance with AIG.

    The act only leveled the playing field with the big international banks that were already merged.

  26. riley Says:

    In Washington not regulating certain entities & products that evolved in the past ten or twenty years counts as de-regulation just as not increasing a budget is a budget cut.

  27. TDL Says:

    riley,
    That is not the same thing. I was not asking a philosophical question, I was asking for specific actions that were taken by the USG to abolish laws & regs. Non-action, in this case, is not the equivalent of action.

    Regards,
    TDL

  28. Joe Tate Says:

    TDL,

    I don’t think it was the removal of provisions of the Glass-Steagal act that caused this problem, as some do. I also don’t believe tha it was the Community Reinvestment Act that caused this problem.

    I think that it was having CRA ratings tied to GSA removal (requiring an acceptable CRA rating in order for banks to expand, merge, or acquire) is in part what lead to these toxic securities, then having Fannie and Freddy consume these (and them cooking the books) concealed the problem for a while, and the loosening of GSA allowed for greater exposure.

46 queries. 0.386 seconds.