It is always a good thing to start the morning with a strong cup of black coffee (no milk, no sugar, thank you) and a good, loud belly laugh. Absurdity is often the root of a good laugh. Exhibit #1 today: Wall Street is now unhappy with the president and some of those characters don’t want to write checks to buy his allegiance in a second Obama Administration.
My end point, after looking at the absurdity, greed and whether this is accurate, is this: if the president wanted a guaranteed path to victory, he’d go on national television and publicly state that he won’t take a dime from any of the fat-cats on Wall Street. Because those people are petrified of any whiff of opposition that would change the narrative and call them out for their greed. And that is why OccupyWallStreet is such a threat to them.
First, the buzz:
The race is on to tap one of the most vital sources of campaign cash — Wall Street — and the early results are not looking good for President Obama.
The president’s campaign struggled this week to sell out a fundraising dinner Friday at Manhattan’s gilded Four Seasons restaurant despite its being hosted by America’s No. 1 capitalist, Warren Buffett, according to people close to the campaign who were not authorized to speak publicly. The dinner for 100 was also a relative bargain at $10,000 a plate; recent fundraisers in Hollywood and New York have gone for $35,800 a pop.
The episode highlights a worrying trend for the Obama campaign. Wall Street, a key contributor to Obama in 2008, seems to be switching allegiances.
"His record has been one of reform and that has been an uncomfortable process for some of the major sources of political cash," said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks political fundraising.
Or as one big-ticket Wall Street fundraiser for Obama put it: "It’s more difficult this time around."
The race is far from over, but Obama’s difficulties speak to his contentious relationship with the financial community. After raising $43 million from the industry in 2008, he has spent much of his first term railing against Wall Street’s excesses. Pushing for financial reform, he made a reference to "fat cat bankers" that still has executives smarting.[emphasis added]
So, a trip back to reality, using the bolded comments above.
The Truth: respectfully, the president has not spent "most of his first term railing" against Wall Street "excesses". Sure, here and there, a few wrist slaps popped up that made headlines.
And, while I respect Sheila Krumholz and her long-time work on campaign finance reform, you cannot, in any sense, call the changes–presumably mostly contained in Dodd-Frank–anything but some changes around the edges.
None of the executives who ran the firms that caused the financial implosion–from Goldman Sachs to Standard & Poor’s–have been indicted. The opposite: most of them still have their jobs and they are reaping millions of dollars in pay. And, when it comes to the banks, the Administration is actually leaning on the New York Attorney General to get with the program and stop standing in the way of a sweetheart deal that gives bank executives a permanent "stay-out-of-jail" card for past transgressions.
And there is nothing in the pipeline, from the White House (or Congress, for that matter) that would do what we really need: cut Wall Street’s role in the economy down to a much smaller role. Indeed, let’s be clear: as I wrote recently, the president still has many wealthy bankers and hedge fund guys who are ready to write checks.
So, what is going on here?
GREED AND FEAR.
The greed is simply about most of these guys wanting to continue to reap huge fortunes on the backs of working people. This isn’t the first time Wall Street money has signaled its desire to switch horses in 2012–Earlier this year, I wrote about a move by billionaire hedge fund managers to defeat Obama.
This all comes down to what my favorite capitalist Bill Gates, Sr. says: "The rich guys don’t want to pay the tax."
The FEAR is a positive sign. These guys understand how angry people are. They understand that they are one massive uprising away from a sea change in how our country is run and how wealth is distributed. I am not saying that uprising is happening tomorrow but…
To emphasize again: the changes have been tepid. What some of these Wall Street titans wants to do is punish the president and get someone else in the White House simply because the president scolded them.
Get it. Words make them tremble and angry. Not actions. Words.
So, while I am quite confident this will never happen, as a political matter, the president has nothing to lose and, I would argue, a lot to gain from telling the entire lot of the Wall Street leaders to take a hike. Declare that he will not take any contribution over $100 from anyone associated with a firm that has an interest in the financial system that caused our meltdown–a $100 being a contribution affordable for thousands of regular workers in that industry, who I would venture to guess, are angry at the higher-ups who pocket the huge bonuses and endanger the jobs and livelihoods and homes and life savings of a lot of other people.
And it would certainly make an impression on a lot of voters who feel like no one stands up for them, that the people on Wall Street screwed the country and walked away with a fortune and nothing has changed.
