Home | About | Donate

'Too Big to Exist': Sanders Introduces Bill to Break Up Big Banks


'Too Big to Exist': Sanders Introduces Bill to Break Up Big Banks

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who announced his candidacy for president for 2016 in April, on Wednesday introduced a bill to break up the country's biggest banks—just a day after the Senate passed a Republican budget that takes aim at many progressive issues.


Bernie is one of the select few elected officials in Washington D.C. who takes the oath of office seriously. His pledge to work for the common good of this nation and all it’s citizens stands in contrast to the majority there who serve the corporite elite who have filled their campaign coffers.


I say we peons ought to keep track of who votes for this bill and who doesn’t and then make damn sure we vote those traitors out the next time they run!


That’s exactly what bills like this can do even if they have NO chance of passing. You get people on the record, and then you send them packing. This is why Dems are failures out of the gate when they don’t fight the fights that need to be fought. You don’t concede anything before you begin, because the PROCESS is clarifying …


A trust buster to rival Teddy Roosevelt’s trust busting ?


The other thing we should be doing is calling our reps and telling them this bill is something they should vote for – mind you, I’d like to tell them vote for this or risk getting fired in the next election, but I’m afraid they would accuse us of blackmailing them if we tried that.
And then there’s my old suspicious crone nature that says Bernie only introduces these bills b/c he knows they’ll never pass, but they make him look good to the peons. :pensive:


Thank you Bernie. How is it that there are so few of you?


If your “representatives” are anything like my two Democratic Party Senators and Democratic Party Congressman they won’t accuse you of blackmailing or anything else, they will just reply with form letters that confirm they are Obama rubber stamps and care about what their corporate sponsors want, not what you or I want.


Clinton has been criticized for what some see as a friendly relationship with Wall Street, having taken millions of dollars in contributions from financial firms and other big corporations throughout her political career.

To avoid the FOXification of news sydrome that sentence is completely within journalistic standards to drop “what some see as” and a slight change in the sentence structure.

In my opinion it would be better reported to say…

Clinton has been criticized for having a friendly relationship with Wall Street, taking millions of dollars in contributions from financial firms and other big corporations throughout her political career.

That is an objective truth, unless one might question the meaning of the phrase “friendly relationship”. Characterizing that relationship as “friendly” would be no less editorializing than characterizing it as “potentially quid pro quo”.

No insult is intended to the writer.


There are so few Bernies because low tax rates on multimillionaires and billionaires have given them enough disposable cash that they can buy as many politicians as they need to swing legislation in their favor.

During the New Deal era (1935-1975) when tax rates were higher the 1% could still afford all the mansions, yachts, private aircraft and other material wealth that they wanted, they just couldn’t own governments outright.


let’s see if Hiliary has the balls to step up and agree with this position…of course, we have learned that politicians like Hiliary will say what we like to hear but we have to watch to see what direction if any follow up actions go in. Obama talks big but doesn’t do the walk!


Lets stop beating around the bush !

For funding his 1992 and 1996 campaigns, Clinton gave Wall Street NAFTA, GATT, telecom dereg., killed welfare, killed Glass Steagall, deregulated commodities futures speculation, etc.

The Clintons put down roots in NYC before leaving the white house even though neither had previously lived in the state of New York, including the Senate run.

Post-white house paybacks have included a $200,000 per year Wall Street job straight out of college in 2001 for Chelsea, an 8 figure annual corporate speaking fee income ($17 million in 2013 alone), and boatloads of corporate cash funding the Clinton Foundation.

The Clinton/Wall Street connection is unequivocal.


Good point.


Why are you replying to me as if I’m defending Clinton? Your comment should be in the main, not as a reply to me.


I’m not a fan of referring to women as having to have “balls”. Some men need to get a vagina.

Anyway, that said, Hillary Clinton of course will not actually stand up to Wall Street or the banks.


You got it! With the current system all we can do is watch.


Iceland has recovered from the global banking crisis and is the fastest growing economy in the E.U. This is largely due to bailing out homeowners instead of bailing out banks, and holding bankers responsible for their crimes. It seems when you bail out the homeowner, the money still goes to the bank. This doubles the impact of the bailout dollar. It is people walking about with brass in pocket that grows the economy, not any Trickle Down Fairytale…Forum Post: ICELAND Putting Bankers and Politicians on trial for corruption !!
Former leader of Iceland put on trial for economic crisis | PRI.ORG
Mar 6, 2012 – Geir Haarde is thought to be the first world leader to be put on trial …The trial of the former Iceland prime minister started on Monday


And that’s exactly where taxes need to be now to re-create the middle class. Top brackets should be into the 90% tax rate. Nobody should be making 10s to 100s of millions of dollars without being taxed at 90%. No human beings need to be making that much money. We could transform society if we had a more progressive tax structure…


Thanks, iPrayForRevolution. You made the point I keep trying to make every time one of these, “Oooh, he’s so cool and courageous” articles gets posted at CD. It’s utter bullshit and Kabuki theater. Sanders is a monstrous hypocrite. He knows everything he’s talking about is impossible and won’t happen. But he’s being bought off (most likely, as you suggest, with a post in the Clinton administration) to make is seem like our Congress actually has a progressive element.

I’m with you. I’d rather have the whore I know (Clinton) than the whore who pretends not to be one.

And ain’t it disgusting the way the commenters at CD actually take this guy seriously? We’re doomed.


Word! Take the issues to their front door! Force the conversation. You go Bernie