Elizabeth Warren: Nothing much has changed

October 18, 2009 | By | 8 Replies More

Elizabeth Warren has lots of bad news, the “stabilized” economy and the huge Wall Street bonuses notwithstanding. Warren is the Chair of the Congressional TARP Oversight Panel.

Good for her, hammering on Henry Paulson’s enormous bait and switch. Most of that TARP money was supposed to be used for loans for small businesses, not more gambling and bonuses, which is where it appears to have gone. Yet, according to Warren, there will “never” be a meaningful accounting of that money.


Tags: , ,

Category: Economy, Politics, Psychology Cognition

About the Author ()

Erich Vieth is an attorney focusing on consumer law litigation and appellate practice. He is also a working musician and a writer, having founded Dangerous Intersection in 2006. Erich lives in the Shaw Neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri, where he lives half-time with his two extraordinary daughters.

Comments (8)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Tim Hogan says:

    When is someone going to jail? It ain't over 'til there's a passle of Wall Streeters and clowns from AIG in jail!

  2. Erich Vieth says:

    More people who are well-positioned to know clearly state that nothing of substance has changed. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/bush-tar

  3. Erich Vieth says:

    And consider these words of Inspector General Neil Barofsky:

    "Despite the aspects of TARP that could reasonably be viewed as a substantial success," he wrote, "Treasury's actions in this regard have contributed to damage the credibility of the program and of the government itself, and the anger, cynicism and distrust created must be chalked up as one of the substantial, albeit unnecessary, costs of TARP."

    Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/21/neil-bar

  4. Brynn Jacobs says:

    Matt Taibbi is calling for drafting Elizabeth Warren to run for the presidency in 2012.

    We need someone who will run on one very basic principle — the refusal to accept corporate money. That someone will have to be willing to be a symbol of voter empowerment. If someone like Elizabeth Warren doesn’t want that responsibility, well, she shouldn’t have gone into office and gone on TV making all that sense and shit. She’s pushed for transparency in the Fed, is openly furious about the misuse of bailout money, and seems to take personally the chicanery that credit card companies and banks use to game the suckers out there. I simply cannot see her suddenly flipping and holding $2000-a-plate fundraisers with Lloyd Blankfein and Jamie Dimon.

    • Erich Vieth says:

      I agree with Matt Tabbi. Elizabeth Warren is one of my heroes. Not just because she says things that make sense. These have been her well thought out positions for many years.

      Here's the scary thing, though. What if the election system is so incredibly gamed that you can't get to square one unless you have big money in your pocket. Think how smart candidates are declared to be "not serious candidates" and "minor candidates" just because mainstream media declares that they aren't among "the anointed ones." It takes big money to get credibility in our screwed up thoroughly corrupted political system. And now, the United States Supreme Court is about to make it easier than ever for big money from profit-driven corporations to drive message of non-monied candidates into the far dark corners of the media. It will make Swift-boating look like a kid's game, if the SCOTUS. http://dangerousintersection.org/2009/09/05/us-su

      Then what kind of choice to candidates really have? Play the game somewhat or not at all, right? And once they play "somewhat," it's a slippery slope, the kind of slope that has (in my opinion) kept Obama from invoking meaning reform that should make the Wall Street financial sector squeal in pain for the benefit of Main Street and the ordinary citizens who supposedly run this country.

  5. Paul says:

    Ms. Warren has been an entertaining figure to see interviewed, and she appears very competent. When, though, will be begin accepting responsibility for her job? It is great to go around the country talking about how you don't know where the money is, and getting a good laugh from the crowd. But… umm….. isn't it her job to figure this stuff out?

    Honeymoon is over, Ms. Warren. If you don't know where the money is, you are partially culpable.

    • Erich Vieth says:

      Paul: If Congress had given Elizabeth Warren the power to issue subpoenas and enforce them, I might agree with you that she is "partially culpable." But they've tied her hands. Further, it has become increasingly clear that there was not any accounting method in place when the money was doled out. None of this is Ms. Warren's fault.

      Give her real power to knock heads and get to the bottom of this, and I have confidence that she would get the job done more than anyone on Wall Street would want to think about.

Leave a Reply