« Back

Not to beat a dead horse, but …

Beverly Mann | February 5, 2013 11:06 am

Law

In further follow-up to my post of yesterday (I already appended the original post yesterday) called, “Stories That Will Continue to Get Far Too Little Attention As Long As Obama Allows Them To.”: Reader coberly and I exchanged the following further comments in the Comments thread:

coberly:

Beverly

just to ease your heart, i agree that the overdraft fees are gouging.

and i even understand that some people can’t do arithmetic.

so i am all for the reforms.

nevertheless, it is better to know what you have in the bank before you write that check or whatever it is you do with ATM’s. And certainly better not to run too close to the edge.

Me:

Yes, Dale. It’s definitely better to do things that way. But, trying to get serious here, because it’s actually a serious matter, the ubiquitous use of debit/credit cards because they’ve effectively replaced cash and checks, and the fact that many millions of people do live on tight budgets, allowed the banks to be grossly abusive in their handling of small, very-short-term overdrafts.

My point is that the new law has been a big deal to a lot of people, some of whom tell pollsters, when asked, that they want “small government” and who vote Republican because of “freedom!” “liberty!” So maybe someone should tell them what the Republicans actually stand for. Freedom! Liberty! And what the Dems’ idea of “big government” actually is.

The intended point of my original post was that if Obama and the congressional Dems and want to leave a meaningful legacy on economics and finance-related matters–if they want to finally end the Repubs’ success at defeating or undermining that legacy–and if they want to regain control of the House in 2014 and tru ly put an end to the profoundly destructive three-decade “conservative-movement” juggernaut that in its current iteration continues to control the mainstream-media conversation and so much of actual policy despite their congressional legislative defeats in 2009 and 2010, and despite their significant popular-vote losses in the presidential, Senate, and House elections last November, the Dems have to engage in a concerted national effort to inform the public about what, in past news-media and political eras, the public would know from observation.

Whew. That was a long sentence. I’m out of breath.

But I’m actually not beating a dead horse. The horse isn’t dead.

4 Comments

Roy Cameron says:

February 5, 2013 at 1:34 pm

The question begging to be answered is: if O and the Dems are so pro-people, pro-middle class-little guy, then why do they have to be prompted, pushed, or even shamed and embarrassed to do the obvious in relation of Big Banks?

Or with China on currency manipulation?

Or with Big Pharma and its egregious rip-off of the American people?

Gee, maybe having a West Wing stand-in for the presidency image-wise was never enough.

It ain’t just the GOP that needs major revision of its POV.
Beverly Mann says:

February 5, 2013 at 2:03 pm

The point of my posts, Roy, is that O. and the Dems not only were already prompted to do something about the banks’ abuse of consumers; they DID do something about it. A few things–including establishing the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau and enacting the statute that bars to the $400 Starbuck’s cup of coffee. Both pieces of legislation were enacted in 2010 but had delayed effective/implementation dates.

What O and the Dems need to do NOW is inform/remind the public of these things and educate them about Republican attempts to undermine Consumer Protection Financial Bureau.

Not sure how you missed that point, since, clearly, I was talking about already-enacted statutes.
coberly says:

February 5, 2013 at 4:25 pm

Speaking as a dead horse

I think O and the 400 dollar Starbucks is a good example of appearing to be “for the people” in a trivial matter while selling the country to the banksters wholesale.

Bev,

I am about 98% on your side on substantive issues, but I think your tactics are counterproductive.

Free checking accounts (no overdraft fees) for the poor poor, and free cigarettes because they are so stressed out.. is not the way to win the hearts and minds of the voters… even poor voters.
Roy Cameron says:

February 5, 2013 at 6:00 pm

I got that. I even appreciated the reduction of ten cents on my debit card.

But Obama’s reform could hurt local community banks and favors Wall St.

In my view, the Dems shy away from true reform because they are still solidly under the direction of Wall St.

Have the Dems brought back Glass-Steagal? Uptick rule?

My point is that the enemy of free markets and the American people is not found only on one side.